UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILH 


G  000  083  102  4 


I  'I 


1; 


i'! 


I'  I'- ''i;  I ! 


ill 


iiiiili 

t!    W 


i 


ill 


mn 


! 


ii 


liHll 


i!i 


It  h'" 


Pi'iliI  I 
ill*! 


lul.l 


!i!;''j;'fi! 


ill!  illlii' i!!! 


i!i;;';l;liJi;J^ri'ii;Ki!:,;liii 


!i!!i'   lii^Siii 


i::i;ii;:i:'''''tli,;iiii 

ili'il'^il^'I'viiMlf'ii^;!; 


iiii'ljiillillililiiiiiiiiiliii'lil 

ill 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT   LOS  ANGELES 


GIFT  OF 

Preston  Harrison 


OLD   TESTAMENT 
HISTORY 


G.  W.  WADE,   D.D. 

SENIOR    TUTOR    OF    S.    DAVId's    COLLEGE,    LAMPETER 


WITH    THREE    MAPS 


FIFTH    EDITION 


NEW  YORK 
E.  P.  BUTTON   AND   COMPANY 

31  WEST  TWENTY-THIRD  STREET 
1908 


; 


) 


PREFACE 


J. 

THE  following  book  is  an  attempt  to  compile  from 
the  Old  Testament  Scriptures,  in  accordance  with 
^  the  principles  of  historical  criticism,  a  connected  account 
«=  of  the  Hebrew  people.   As  it  is  avowedly  an  Old  Testament 
^history,  the  arrangement  of  the  Bible  has  been  adhered 
-?to  so  far  as  chronological  considerations  have  permitted, 
and  its  contents  are  discussed  consecutively,  so  that  the 
reader  is  placed  in  possession  not  only  of  the  conclusions 
^  of  criticism  but  of  the  reasons  for  them.     Much  attention 
■  C  has  been  devoted  to  tracing  the  development  of  religious 
^  belief  and  practice  in  ancient  Israel,  the  stages  reached 
^  at  successive  epochs  being  reviewed  in  separate  chapters. 
^  Information    upon    geographical    and    other    matters    is 
>:; supplied  in  footnotes;  and  the  usefulness  of  the  volume 
(^(it  is  hoped)  has  been   increased  by  several  appendices 

and  a  tolerably  complete  index, 
o     The  subjoined  list  of  books  read  or  consulted  witnesses 
h-to  the  extent  of  my  obligations  to  the  labours  of  others ; 
Sand  as  specific  acknowledgments  have  been  only  sparingly 
introduced  into  the  body  of  the  work,  it  is  the  more  neces- 
sary for  me  to  express  in  this  place  my  indebtedness  to 
all  the  writers  who  are  there  enumerated.     But  I  naturally 
owe  more  to  some  than  to  others ;  and  amongst  those  to 
whom  my  debt  is  greatest  are  Dillmann,  Robertson  Smith, 
Professors  Driver,  Moore,  H.  P.  Smith,  G.  A.  Smith,  Sayce, 
Wellhausen,  and  Kirkpatrick,  and  various  contributors  to 


272S52 


VI  PREFACE 

Hastings'  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  Nevertheless,  though  I 
have  drawn  freely  upon  the  learning  of  previous  writers, 
I  have  throughout  endeavoured  to  verify  their  assertions 
and  to  check  their  inferences,  so  that  the  opinions  ex- 
pressed have  not  been  formed  without  independent  inquiry 
and  a  sense  of  responsible  judgment. 

Of  the  many  defects  of  my  work,  due  to  limitations 
partly  of  space  and  partly  of  capacity,  I  am  fully  con- 
scious, but  its  deficiencies  will  perhaps  appear  less  serious 
if  account  be  taken  of  the  class  of  readers  whose  wants 
it  is  meant  to  supply.  It  is  not  intended  for  scholars,  who 
will  find  in  it  little  that  is  unfamiliar  except  the  mistakes, 
but  for  less  advanced  students,  who  require  in  a  text-book 
not  so  much  extensive  erudition  as  simplicity  of  method 
and  perspicuity  of  statement.  If  it  satisfies  in  any  degree 
the  needs  of  such,  it  will  have  achieved  its  purpose. 

In  conclusion  I  have  to  thank  my  friend  and  colleague, 
the  Rev.  Professor  E.  Tyrrell  Green,  for  his  kindness  in 
reading  the  proof-sheets  and  in  furnishing  me  with  a 
number  of  corrections  and  suggestions. 

G.  W.  W. 

July,  1901 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FOURTH   EDITION 

The  pressure  of  other  work  has  prevented  me  from 
undertaking  a  thorough  revision  of  my  book,  but  various 
misprints  and  errors  have  been  removed  since  the  publica- 
tion of  the  first  edition.  For  the  detection  of  some  of 
these  I  am  indebted  to  Dr.  Driver,  Dr.  C.  Harris,  the 
Rev.  C.  Plummer  (Fellow  of  C.C.C.,  Oxford),  and  certain 
of  my  pupils,  to  all  of  whom  I  desire  to  express  my 
gratitude. 

G.  W.  W. 

Oct.,  1906 


ALUMNIS 

COLLEGII  SANCTI  DAVIDIS 

APUD  LAMPETER 

HOC  OPUSCULUM  QUALECUNQUE  EST 

DEDICAT  AUCTOR 


CONTENTS 


INTRODUCTION 


CHAPTER   I 


THE  PRE-HISTORIC  WORLD 

CHAPTER   II 
THE  PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY      . 

CHAPTER   III 
RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE      . 

CHAPTER   IV 
THE  EXODUS  AND  THE  WANDERINGS       . 

CHAPTER   V 
RELIGION  IN  THE  MOSAIC  AGE 

CHAPTER  VI 
THE  CONQUEST  OF  CANAAN 


CHAPTER  VII 


THE  JUDGES 


CHAPTER  VIII 
THE  RISE  OF  THE  MONARCHY 


CHAPTER   IX 


THE  REIGN  OF  DAVID 


rAGK 

I 


37 
63 
84 
98 
134 
16s 
190 
213 
239 


CHAPTER  X 
RELIGION  FROM  THE  CONQUEST  TO  THE  END  OF  THE  REIGN 

OF  DAVID  .  .  ...     277 


CONTENTS  IX 

CHAPTER  XI  ,^^. 

THE  REIGN  OF  SOLOMON  .  .  ...     294 

CHAPTER   Xn 
ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH     .  .  .  .  .     312 

CHAPTER  XIII 
RELIGION  FROM  THE  ACCESSION  OF  SOLOMON  TO  THE  CLOSE 

OF  THE  EXILE         .  .  .  •  •  •     395 

CHAPTER  XIV 
THE  RETURN  FROM  THE  EXILE  .  ...     465- 

CHAPTER  XV 
RELIGION  AFTER  THE  RETURN  .  ,  .         .     49I 


APPENDIX  A 
ANALYSIS  OF  THE  HEXATEUCH  .  .  .  .512 

APPENDIX   B 
THE  MOABITE  STONE  .  .  .  .  .      514 

APPENDIX   C 
WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES  .  .  .  .  .     516 

APPENDIX   D 
NAMES  AND  ORDER  OF  THE  MONTHS      .  .  .  .      518 


INDEX  .  .  .  .  •  ,         .     5x9 

MAPS 

FACING  PAGE 

1.  THE  WORLD  AS  KNOWN  TO  THE  EARLY   HEBREWS       ,  .  .      63 

2.  THE   PENINSULA  OF  SINAI  ,  ,  ...      98 

3.  CANAAN   AFTER   THE   CONQUEST       .  ,  •  .  .    165 


LIST  OF  BOOKS  READ  OR  CONSULTED 

Addis,  Documents  of  the  Hexateuch. 
Barnes,  Chronicles. 
Baxter,  Sanctuary  and  Sacrifice. 
Bennett,  Joshua  (Polychrome  Bible). 
Bennett  and  Adeney,  Biblical  Introduction, 
Benzing-er,  Die  Biicher  der  Konige. 
Bevan,  The  Book  of  Daniel. 
Boscawen,  The  Bible  and  the  Monuments, 
Brig-gs,  Messianic  Prophecy. 
Bruce,  The  Moral  Order  of  the  World. 
Budde,  The  Keligion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile, 
Burney,  Outlines  of  Old  Testament  Theology. 
Carpenter  and  Harford-Battersby,  The  Hexateuch. 
Charles,  Eschatology. 
Cheyne,  Isaiah  (Polychrome  Bible). 
„        Jeremiahy  his  Life  and  Times, 
,,        Hosea. 
„        Micah. 

,,        Jewish  Religious  Life  after  the  Exile, 
Comill,  History  of  the  People  of  Israel  (Tr.), 

, ,        The  Prophets  of  Israel  (Tr. ). 
Davidson,  Ezekiel, 

„         Job, 
DUlmann,  Genesis. 

„         Exodus  und  Leviticus, 
„  Numeri,  Deuteronomium ,  und  Josuct, 

Driver,  Introduction  to  the  Literature  of  the  Old  Testament 
Notes  on  the  Hebrew  Text  of  the  Books  of  Samuel. 
Deuteronomy. 
Joel  and  Amos. 
Isaiah,  his  Life  and  Times. 
Daniel. 

Essay  in  Authority  and  Archceology, 
Ewald,  History  of  Israel  (Tr.). 

X 


BOOKS  READ  OR  CONSULTED  xi 

Farrar,  The  Book  of  Daniel. 

,,        Solomon,  his  Life  and  Times. 

„        The  Minor  Prophets. 
Frazer,  The  Golden  Bough. 

Giesebrecht,  Die  Berufshegahung  der  Propheten, 
Goldziher,  Mythology  among  the  Hebrews  (Tr.). 
Gray,  The  Divine  Discipline  of  Israel. 
Green,  The  Higher  Criticism  of  the  Pentateuch, 
Harper,  The  Bible  and  Modem  Discoveries. 
Hastings,  Dictionary  of  the  Bible.  * 
Henderson,  Palestine. 
Hommel,  Ancient  Hebrew  Tradition, 
Hunter,  After  the  Exile. 

Jevons,  Introduction  to  the  History  of  Religion, 
Kautzsch,  Outline  of  the  History  of  the  Literature  of  the  Old 

Testament  (Tr.). 
Kennedy,  The  Book  of  Daniel  from  the  Christian  Standpoint, 
Kent,  History  of  the  Hebrew  People. 

,,     History  of  the  fewish  People. 
King-,  Babylonian  Religion. 
Kirkpatrick,  The  Doctrine  of  the  Prophets, 
„  Sam,uel. 

,,  The  Psalms y  bks.  i.-iii. 

Kittel,  History  of  the  Hebrews  (Tr.). 
Lang,  The  Making  of  Religion. 
Martineau,  A  Study  of  Religion. 
Maspero,  The  Struggle  of  the  Nations  (Tr,). 

,,  The  Passing  of  the  Empires  (Tr.) 

McCurdy,  History,  Prophecy,  and  the  Monuments 
Montefiore,  The  Religion  of  Israel  (Hibbert  Lectures). 
Moore,  Judges. 

Mozley,  Ruling  Ideas  in  Early  Ages. 
Ottley,  Aspects  of  the  Old  Testament, 

„       The  Hebrew  Prophets. 
Petrie,  Syria  and  Egypt. 
Piepenbring,  Histoire  du  Peuple  d"* Israel, 

„  Thdologie  de  I'ancien  Testameyit, 

Rawlinson,  Egypt. 

„  Moses,  his  Life  and  Times. 

f,  The  Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah. 

1  The  first  two  volumes  of  this  work  appeared  early  enough  for  me  to  derive 
much  help  from  it,  but  the  others  were  not  published  until  my  own  book  was 
practically  completed,  so  that  I  have  not  been  able  to  make  all  the  use  of  them 
that  I  could  desire. 


xii     BOOKS  READ  OR  CONSULTED 

Riehm,  Messianic  Prophecy  (Tr.). 
Robertson,  Early  Religion  of  Israel. 

„  The  Poetry  and  Religion  of  the  Psalms, 

Ryle,  Ezra  and  Nehemiah. 

Sayce,  The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments, 
„      The  Egypt  of  the  Hebrews. 
,,      Patriarchal  Palestine. 
„      The  Early  History  of  Israel. 
„      Races  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Schrader,  The  Cuneiform  Inscriptions  and  the  Old  Testament  (Tr.). 
Schultz,  Old  Testament  Theology  (Tr.). 
Sinker,  Hezekiah  and  his  Age. 
Skinner,  Isaiah. 

Smith  (G.  A.),  The  Historical  Geography  of  Palestine. 
,,  The  Book  of  Isaiah. 

„  The  Book  of  the  XII.  Prophets, 

Smith  (H.  P.),  Samuel. 

Smith  (W.  Robertson),  The  Old  Testament  in  the  Jewish  Church, 
,,  ,,  The  Prophets  of  Israel. 

,,  ,,  The  Religion  of  the  Semites, 

Stanley,  Sinai  and  Palestine. 

„       Lectures  on  the  Jewish  Church. 
Streane,  Jeremiah. 

,,       The  Age  of  the  Maccabees. 
Van  Hoonacker,  N^hdmie  et  Esdras. 

,,  ,,        Ndhdmie  en  Van  20  d'Artaxerxes  /.,  Esdras  en 

Van  7  d'Artaxerxes  II. 
Wellhausen,  Prolegomena  to  the  History  of  Israel  (Tr.). 

,,  History  of  Israel  and  Judah  (Tr.). 

Whitehouse,  Primer  of  Hebrew  Antiquities. 
Willis,  The  Worship  of  the  Old  Covenant. 

N.B. — All  references,  except  where  otherwise  indicated,  are  made  to  the 
Revised  Version. 


INTRODUCTION 


A  NECESSARY  preliminary  to  every  history  is  a  survey  of 
the  material  from  which  it  is  to  be  drawn.  It  is  therefore 
desirable  to  begin  a  connected  account  of  the  history  contained 
in  the  Old  Testament  by  briefly  passing  under  review  the  several 
books  of  which  the  O.T.  consists,  and  considering  their  origin, 
character,  and  value  as  authorities.  The  traditional  belief  re- 
specting their  authorship,  over  and  above  what  has  been  inferred 
from  the  names  which  are  attached  to  some  of  them,  seems  to 
rest  upon  a  passage  in  the  Talmud  ^  which  makes,  together  with 
some  statements  difficult  to  understand,  the  assertion  that  Moses 
wrote  the  books  known  as  his,  except  the  concluding  eight  verses 
of  the  last ;  that  Joshua  added  these,  and  wrote  his  own  book  ; 
that  Samuel  wrote  not  only  i  and  2  Samuel^  but  likewise  Judges 
and  Ruth;  that  Jeremiah  wrote  Kings  and  Lamentations ^  in 
addition  to  the  book  that  bears  his  name ;  and  that  Ezra  wrote 
a  portion  of  the  books  of  Chronicles^  which  were  completed  by 
Nehemiah.  A  little  reflection,  however,  shows  that  both  the 
titles  of  the  books  and  the  Jewish  traditions  concerning  them 
are  in  many  instances  valueless  as  evidence  of  authorship.  The 
book  of  Joshua^  for  example,  cannot,  as  it  stands,  be  written  by 
Joshua,  for  it  includes  an  account  of  his  death ;  and  though  it 
is  possible  to  explain  this  (like  the  final  verses  of  Deui.)  as  an 
addition  by  another  hand,  the  explanation  fails  when  applied 
to  the  books  of  Samuel;  for  these  include  most  of  the  reign  of 
David,  whereas  Samuel  pre-deceased  Saul  (i  Sam.  xxviii.  3). 
Similarly  the  books  of  Kings^  of  which  the  Talmud  asserts 
Jeremiah  to  be  the  writer,  cannot  well  proceed  from  him,  since 

'  Quoted  in  Driver,  Introd,  to  the  Lit,  of  the  O.T.^  p.  xxxii ,  Bennett  and 
Adeney,  Biblical  Intro'd,^  p.  7. 

B 


2  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

mention  is  made,  in  the  Second  Book  (xxv.  27),  of  the  accession 
of  the  Babylonian  King  Evil  Merodach  (561  B.C.),  whereas 
Jeremiah,  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  586,  was  conveyed 
not  to  Babylon  but  to  Egypt  {Jer.  xliii.  6,  7),  and  is  scarcely 
likely  to  have  survived  until  561  if  his  prophetic  ministry  began 
as  early  as  624  or  626  (see  Jer.  i.  2).  The  First  Book  of 
Chronicles  (in  iii.  19-24)  carries  the  genealogy  of  Zerubbabel 
(«>.  520  BC.)  down  to  the  6th  generation  after  him  {i.e.  cir. 
340  B.c.),^  and  therefore  must  have  been  composed  later  than 
this  last  date,  whilst  Nehemiah,  to  whom  the  Talmud  attributes 
its  completion,  lived  a  century  earlier.  As  the  external  testimony 
is  thus  unsatisfactory,  it  is  necessary  to  have  recourse  to  the 
internal  evidence ;  and  an  explanation  of  the  origin  of  the  O.T. 
writings  must  be  sought  from  the  writings  themselves. 

The  help  which  the  O.T.  Scriptures  furnish  for  the  settlement 
of  the  question  of  their  origin  and  date  is  derived  not  only  from 
their  allusions,  but  from  an  analysis  of  their  structure.  Hebrew 
writers,  in  place  of  first  assimilating,  and  then  repeating  in  their 
own  language,  the  information  obtained  from  earlier  authorities, 
were  frequently  accustomed  to  incorporate  in  their  own  com- 
positions longer  or  shorter  extracts  from  such  authorities,  re- 
produced verbatim.  For  instance,  the  identity  of  Is.  il  2-4  with 
Mic.  iv.  1-3  points  to  the  appropriation,  by  one  of  these  prophets, 
of  the  production  of  the  other,  or  by  both  of  the  work  of  a 
third;  and  the  close  resemblance  oi  Jer.  xlix.  14-16  to  Obad.  1-4 
leads  to  a  similar  conclusion.  The  writer  of  Chronicles  has 
followed  the  same  practice  on  a  much  larger  scale.  A  com- 
parison of  numerous  passages  in  these  books  with  the  parallels 
in  Sam.  and  Kgs.  noted  in  the  margin  of  the  ILV.  will  show 
that  the  author  has  extracted  large  portions  of  these  latter  books 
and  inserted  them  in  the  body  of  his  own  work,  from  which  they 
are  sufficiently  distinguished  by  their  style  and  spirit.  It  will  be 
obvious  that  certain  sections  of  such  books  as  have  been  com- 
piled in  this  manner  are  practically  distinct  compositions,  even 
though  they  may  not  exist  in  a  separate  form  (as  is  the  case  with 

the  passages  derived  by  Chronicles  from  Sam.  and  Kgs)^  and 

/ 
1  The  text  is  obscure,  but  it  names  six  generations  at  least.     The  LXX. 
gives  eleven. 


INTRODUCTION  3 

may  possess  much  greater  authority  than  the  complete  work  of 
which  they  form  part. 

For  the  purpose  of  the  present  investigation,  the  O.T.  writings 
may  be  conveniently  classified  into  (I.)  those  which  are  pro- 
fessedly of  the  nature  of  histories :  (II.)  those  which  are  of  a 
different  character.  In  the  case  of  the  latter  it  is  only  neces- 
sary to  determine  the  age  which  produced  them  in  order  to  use 
them  at  once  as  evidence  for  its  conditions  and  circumstances. 
But  behind  the  former  lie  their  sources,  which  equally  with  them- 
selves call  for  consideration,  so  that  the  inquiry  in  consequence 
is  more  extensive  and  involved.  This  class,  in  which  must  be 
included  the  Pentateuch,  will  comprehend  all  the  books  (as 
arranged  in  the  English  Bible)  from  Genesis  to  Esther ;  whilst 
the  other  class  will  comprise  the  remainder. 

I.  The  Pentateuch  and  Joshua.  The  books  of  Moses  profess 
to  cover  a  period  of  history  extending  from  the  Creation  to  the 
death  of  Moses ;  so  that  even  if  Moses  were  the  writer  of  them, 
a  long  interval  would  separate  the  record  from  many  of  the 
events  recorded.  But  the  inference,  suggested  not  only  by  the 
mention  of  Moses*  death  but  by  the  knowledge  shown  of  the 
entrance  into  Canaan  {Ex.  xvi.  35,  cf.  Josh.  v.  12),  the  ex- 
termination of  the  Canaanites  {Gefi.  xii.  6,  xiii.  7,  Deut.  ii.  12), 
and  the  institution  of  the  kingdom  {Gen.  xxxvi.  31),  that  they 
are  later  than  Moses  is  confirmed  by  an  examination  of  their 
structure.  A  scrutiny  of  the  first  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch 
reveals  here  and  there  a  double  strand  of  narrative,  presenting 
duplicate  accounts  of  the  same  subject,  each  composed  in  a 
style  and  with  a  vocabulary  of  its  own,  which  sometimes  repeat 
and  sometimes  contradict  each  other.  Some  of  the  more  con- 
siderable inconsistencies  will  come  under  notice  in  the  course  of 
the  history;^  whilst  the  difference  in  phraseology  where  the 
resemblance  in  substance  is  closer  may  be  illustrated  on  a  small 
scale  by  the  following  parallel  passages  \'^ 

1  See  pp.  55,  57,78,  107,  etc. 

'  In  addition  to  the  dififerences  in  vocabulary  observable  in  the  sections 
quoted  at  length,  the  following  are  noteworthy.  In  the  account  of  the 
Creation,  Gen.  ii.  makes  no  mention  of  creeping  things,  which  Gen.  i. 
names  repeatedly  (ver.  24,  25,  26) ;  in  the  account  of  the  Flood  certain 
sections  use  blot  out  (vi.  7,  vii.  4,  23  marg. )  whilst  others  uniformly  employ 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Gen.  ii.  5,  7-9,  19,  22. 
And  no  plant  of  the  field 
was  yet  in  the  earth,  and  no 
herb  of  the  field  had  yet 
sprung  up :  for  Jehovah  God 
had  not  caused  it  to  rain  upon 
the  earth  and  there  was  not  a 

man  to  till  the  ground And 

Jehovah  God  formed  man  of 
the  dust  of  the  ground,  and 
breathed  into  his  nostrils  the 
breath  of  life,  and  man  became 
a  living  soul.  And  Jehovah 
God  planted  a  garden  eastward 
in  Eden ;  and  there  he  put  the 
man  whom  he  had  for^ned. 
And  out  of  the  ground  made 
Jehovah  God  to  grow  every 
tree  that  is  pleasant  to  the  sight 
and  good  for  food.  .  . .  And  out 
of  the  ground  Jehovah  God 
fomied  every  beast  of  the  fields 
and  every  fowl  of  the  air.  .  .  . 
And  of  (a)  rib  which  Jehovah 
God  had  taken  from  the  man 
made  he  a  woman. 


Gen.  i.  i,  11-12,  25-27. 
In  the  beginning  God  created 
the  heaven  and  the  earth  .  .  . 
And  God  said.  Let  the  earth 
put  forth  grass,  herb  yielding 
seed  and  fruit  tree  bearing  fruit 
after  its  kind^  wherein  is  the 
seed  thereof,  upon  the  earth : 
and  it  was  so.  And  the  earth 
brought  forth  grass,  herb  yield- 
ing seed  after  its  kind^  and 
tree  bearing  fruit,  wherein  is 
the  seed  thereof,  after  its  kind: 
and  God  saw  that  it  was  good 
.  .  .  And  God  made  the  beast 
of  the  earth  after  its  kind ;  and 
the  cattle  after  their  kind,  and 
everything  that  creepeth  upon 
the  ground  after  its  ki?id,  and 
God  saw  that  it  was  good.  And 
God  said.  Let  us  make  man 
in  our  image,  after  our  like- 
ness .  .  .  And  God  created 
man  in  his  own  image,  in  the 
image  of  God  created  he  him : 
male  and  female  created  he 
them. 


Ex.  vii.  14-18  (part). 

And  Jehovah  said  unto  Moses 

.  .  .  Get  thee  unto  Pharaoh,  and 

thou  shalt  say  unto  him  .  .  . 

Thus   saith  Jehovah,    In    this 


Ex.  vii.  19. 

And  Jehovah  said  unto  Moses, 

Say  ufito  Aaron^  Take  thy  rod, 

and  stretch  out  thine  hand  over 

the  waters  of  Egypt,  over  their 


destroy  (vi.  13,  17,  ix.  Ii,  15) ;  and  in  the  narrative  of  the  Plagues  of  Egypt 
one  series  of  passages,  to  describe  Pharaoh's  obstinacy,  says  that  his  Juart 
was  heavy  or  he  made  his  heart  heavy  {Ex.  vii.  14,  viii.  15,  32,  ix.  7,  34 
marg.),  whereas  another  series  says  that  his  heart  was  strong  ox  Jehovah  made 
his  heart  strong  {\i\.  13,  22,  viii.  19,  ix.  12,  35,  x.  20,  27,  xi.  10  marg.). 


INTRODUCTION 


5 


thou  shalt  know  that  I  am 
Jehovah :  behold  I  will  smite 
with  the  rod  that  is  in  mine 
hand  upon  the  waters  which 
are  in  the  river,  and  they  shall 
be' turned  to  blood.  And  the 
fish  that  is  in  the  river  shall 
die,  and  the  river  shall  stink; 
and  the  Egyptians  shall  loathe 
to  drink  water  from  the  river. 


rivers,  over  their  streams,  and 
over  their  pools,  and  over  all 
their  ponds  of  water,  that  they 
may  become  blood,  and  there 
shall  be  blood  throughout  all 
the  land  of  Egypt. 


Ex.  viii.  1-4  (part). 
And  Jehovah  spake  unto 
Moses,  Go  in  unto  Pharaoh 
and  say  unto  him  ...  I  will 
smite  all  thy  borders  with  frogs, 
and  the  river  shall  swarm  with 
frogs  which  shall  go  up  and 
come  into  thine  house  and  into 
thy  bedchamber  and  upon  thy 
bed,  and  into  the  house  of  thy 
servants,  and  upon  thy  people. 


Ex.  viii.  5. 
And  Jehovah  said  unto  Moses, 
Say  unto  Aaron,  Stretch  forth 
thine  hand  with  thy  rod  over 
the  rivers,  over  the  streams, 
and  over  the  pools,  and  cause 
frogs  to  come  up  upon  the  land 
of  Egypt. 


Through  a  large  extent  of  the  four  books  there  runs,  indeed, 
only  a  single  thread  of  narrative;  but  the  variation  in  style  in 
different  parts  of  this  is  sufficient  to  connect  the  several  sections 
with  one  or  other  of  the  two  threads  which  are  interwoven  else- 
where. When  the  separate  portions  of  each  of  these  constituent 
factors  are  brought  together,  they  are  found  to  form  two  more  or 
less  continuous  compositions,  originally  independent  of  each 
other,  which  have  been  amalgamated  (though  not  in  their 
entirety)  by  a  compiler.  One  of  these,  from  containing  the 
greater  part  of  the  ceremonial  law,  has  been  entitled  the  Priestly 
narrative;^  whilst  the  other,  which  itself  shows  signs  (by  repeti- 

^  The  style  of  the  Priestly  code  is  exceedingly  precise  and  formal  (see 
Gen.  i.,  Num.  vii.,  xxvi.)  and  its  phraseology  is  very  distinctive  :  amongst  the 
expressions  which  constantly  recur  are  create,  after  its  {their)  kind,  male  and 
female,  all  flesh,  establish  a  covenant,  be  fruitful  and  multiply ,  in  the  selfsame 
day,  substance,  cut  off  from  his  people,  gathered  to  his  people,  land  of  thy  {his. 


6  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

tions  and  discrepancies)  of  being  composite  in  texture,^  is 
known  as  the  Prophetic  narrative  (more  by  way  of  antithesis  to 
the  former  than  from  much  resemblance  to  the  writings  of  the 
prophets).  The  two  may  be  conveniently  denoted  by  the  symbols 
P  and  JE  (the  latter  letters  standing  for  the  two  Divine  names 
Jehovah  and  Elohim  (God)  which  in  Genesis  are  the  chief  criteria 
for  distinguishing  the  component  elements  into  which  it  is  be- 
lieved that  the  Prophetic  narrative  can  be  partially  analysed). 
The  book  of  Deuteronomy  (symbohsed  by  D),  which  is  at 
variance  with  JE  and  P  in  its  account  of  certain  matters  related 
by  them  in  common,^  is  distinguished  from  both  by  its  phrase- 
ology which  is  of  a  strongly  marked  character.  ^  The  Pentateuch, 
as  a  whole,  thus  appears  to  be  composed  of  at  least  three 
sources,  if  not  of  four.  Sections  of  all  these  likewise  occur  in 
the  book  oi  Joshua^  so  that  the  title  Hexateuch  (embracing  the 
first  six  books  of  the  O.T.)  is  now  widely  used  to  denote  the 
Pentateuch  together  with  the  book  that  follows  it. 

The  fact  that  Joshua  is  thus  united  to  the  so-called  Books 
of  Moses  by  its  literary  structure  disposes  of  the  belief  that 
Moses  can  be  the  author  of  the  latter.  It  would  be  untenable 
even  if  the  phraseology  characteristic  of  P,  JE,  and  D  re- 
spectively were  confined  to  these  five  books,  for  it  is  very 
unlikely  that  Moses  should  have  written  different  parts  of  his 
own  memoirs  in  a  variety  of  styles  which  has  little  relation  to 
the  variety  of  the  subject-matter.  But  when  the  succeeding 
book  (which  records  the  death  of  Joshua)  is  found  to  share  this 
feature  with  them,  it  is  clear  that  the  compiler  of  the  whole  must 
have  hved  later  than  Joshua  and  a  fortiori  later  than  Moses. 

The  dates  of  JE,  P,  and  D  can  only  be  determined  vaguely. 
JE  was  composed  subsequently  to  the  estabHshment  of  Israel 
in  Canaan,  for  Gen.  xii.  6,  xiii.  7  (already  referred  to)  belong 

tJuir)  sojournings,  for  a  possession.  Phrases  which  are  frequent  in  the 
legislative  portions  are  the  congregation  (of  Israel),  throughoiU  your  {their) 
generations,  bear  his  {their)  iniquity^  wickedness  (or  lewdness). 

»  See  p.  78,  104,  107.  '  See  pp.  134  foil. 

•  Frequently  recurring  expressions  are  observe  to  do,  take  heed  to  thyself 
{yourselves)  lest,  that  your  days  may  be  long,  by  a  strong  hand  and  a  stretched 
out  arm,  cause  to  inherit,  cause  My  nanu  to  dwells  with  all  your  heart  and 
with  nil  your  soul,  to  do  that  which  is  right  {evil)  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah  ;  see 
Driver,  Introd.^  pp.  91  foil. 


INTRODUCTION  ; 

to  this  source,  and  some  of  the  laws  of  Exodus  which  are 
included  in  it  imply  a  settled  and  agricultural,  not  a  nomadic  and 
pastoral,  community  (xxi.  6,  xxii.  6).  The  literary  skill  it  evinces 
indicates  that  it  was  not  written  until  the  Israelites  had  become 
w^ell  acquainted  with  the  art  of  composition ;  and  its  origin  may 
plausibly  be  placed  within  the  period  of  the  Monarchy.  The 
presence  in  it  of  the  Blessing  of  Jacob  {Gen.  xlix.)  is  consistent 
with  a  date  within  the  reigns  of  David  or  Solomon  (see  p.  82) ; 
but  its  inclusion  of  the  Blessing  of  Esau  {Gtn.  xxvii.  39-40) 
probably  requires  it  to  be  brought  down  to  the  ninth  century  B.C. 
It  was,  however,  earlier  than  Deuteronomy  which,  for  part  of  its 
contents,  is  dependent  upon  it.  That  this  latter  book  was 
written  towards  the  close  of  the  Monarchy  in  Judah  is  suggested 
by  the  fact  that  it  was  not  until  a  late  period  in  the  history  of  that 
kingdom  that  the  warning  (iv.  19,  xvii.  2-5)  against  planet- 
worship  became  needed,  or  the  injunction  (xii.  5)  to  confine  the 
public  service  of  Jehovah  to  a  single  sanctuary  was  carried  out 
(though  several  of  the  early  sovereigns  of  Judah  were  God- 
fearing rulers).  The  worship  of  the  host  of  heaven  is  mentioned 
in  connection  with  the  kingdom  of  Israel  as  early  as  the  eighth 
century  {Am.  v.  25,  cf.  2  Kg.  xvii.  16);  and  in  Judah  certain 
reforms  effected  by  Hezekiah  accorded  with  the  precepts 
of  Deut.  But  Manasseh  in  the  seventh  century  was  the 
first  Judaean  king  who  worshipped  the  host  of  heaven ;  and 
Deuteronomy  may  have  been  produced  as  a  protest  against  his 
idolatry.  It  was  certainly  in  existence  in  the  time  of  Josiah, 
when  a  copy  of  it  was  found  in  the  Temple  {2  Kg.  xxii.  8, 
see  pp.  376-7),  and  some  of  the  features  of  its  peculiar  style  re- 
appear in  Jeremiah^  who  lived  in  the  reigns  of  Josiah  and  his 
successors.  1  The  origin  of  P  may  with  some  probability  be 
assigned  to  the  time  of  the  Exile,  when  the  suspension  of  all 
sacrificial  worship  would  render  it  desirable,  in  view  of  the 
expected  Return,  to  draw  up  in  writing  a  body  of  regulations 
which  previously  custom  alone  had  been  competent  to  evolve 
and  transmit.  This  conclusion  is  supported  by  the  facts  (i.)  that 
the  ceremonial  legislation  peculiar  to  it  was  largely  unobserved 

^  With  the  phrases  quoted  in  the  previous  note  cf.  Jer.  xxi.  5  (xxvii.  5, 
xxxii.  21),  xii.  14,  vii.  12,  xxxiv.  15. 


8  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

throughout  the  period  of  the  Kings  (as  described  in  the  books  of 

Kings)  under  circumstances  which  seem  to  indicate  that  such 
neglect  was  due  not  to  wilful  disobedience  but  to  ignorance : 
(ii.)  that  its  characteristic  vocabulary  first  occurs  on  any  con- 
siderable scale  in  Ezekiel^'^  a  prophet  of  the  Captivity :  (iii.)  that 
to  certain  of  its  arrangements  near,  though  not  exact,  parallels 
are  found  in  Ezekiel's  regulations  for  the  Israelite  community 
when  restored  to  its  own  land — regulations  which  are  less  likely 
to  be  modifications  of  long-established  and  authoritative  institu- 
tions than  the  tentative  beginnings  out  of  which  the  enactments 
of  the  Priestly  coc'e  resulted.  P,  for  example,  contains  pro- 
visions, among  others,  which  {a)  restrict  the  priesthood 
to  the  descendants  of  Aaron  (instead  of  allowing  it  to  be 
shared  by  all  Levites,  as  represented  by  Deut.),  {b)  assign  for 
the  habitation  of  the  priests  certain  cities,  {c)  station  the 
sanctuary  in  the  midst  of  the  camp  (instead  of  outside  it,  as 
represented  by  JE),^  {d)  ordain  an  annual  ceremony  of  atone- 
ment for  the  sanctuary  and  its  furniture,  {e)  appoint  a  daily  flesh 
sacrifice,  both  morning  and  evening;  and  to  these  a  significant 
resemblance  is  borne  by  the  directions  of  Ezekicl^  which  {a)  con- 
fine the  priesthood  to  the  descendants  of  Aaron's  son  Zadok, 
{b)  allot  to  the  priests  a  certain  portion  of  holy  ground  round  the 
sanctuary,  {c)  place  the  latter  in  the  midst  of  the  tribes,  {d)  enjoin 
atonement  to  be  made  twice  a  year  for  the  sanctuary  and  altar, 
(tf)  establish  a  daily  flesh  sacrifice  every  morning,  the  prophet's 
precepts  appearing  to  be  in  some  respects  less  developed  than 
those  of  the  Priestly  code.  The  distinction  between  the  Priests 
and  Levites  prevailed  at  the  time  of  the  Return  in  536  {Ez.  ii.) ; 
and  the  arrangements  which  Nehemiah  is  represented  as  carrying 
out  at  Jerusalem  in  444  B.C.  agree  generally  with  certain  of  the 
other  peculiar  requirements  of  P  (see  pp.  492-3).  The  Priestly 
code  was  therefore  practically  completed,  and  probably  fused  with 
the  other  sources  of  the  Hexateuch*  into  a  single  whole,  before 
the  last-mentioned  date. 

^  See,  for  instance,  xiv.  8,  10,  xvi.  43,  58,  60,  62,  xxi.  30,  xxiv.  2, 
xxviii.  13,  15,  xxxvi.  II,  xl.  I,  xlv.  5,  xlvii.  10;  and  comp.  p.  5,  note. 

2  See  p.  140. 

'  See  Ezek.  xliv.  10-16,  xlviii.  (cf.  Davidson  ad  loc),  xlv.  18-25. 

^  Certain  portions  of  Deuteronomy  as  it  exists  at  present  are  derived  from 
the  Priestly  Source,  e.g.  xxxii.  48-52,  xxxiv.  7-9. 


INTRODUCTION  9 

Judges,  Ruth,  1,  2  Samuel,  1,  2  Kings.  The  historical  books 
from  Judges  to  Kings  appear,  like  the  Hexateuch,  to  be  of  compo- 
site texture.  The  accounts  of  the  Judges,  for  example,  which 
form  the  central  portion  of  the  book  of  Judges^  are,  for  the  most 
part,  introduced  and  concluded  by  short  observations  (serving  as 
a  framework  for  them)  which  are  all  cast  in  a  uniform  mould  (see 
for  introduction  iii.  7,  12,  iv.  i,  vi.  i,  x.  6,  xiii.  i,  and  for  con- 
clusion iii.  II,  30,  V.  31,  viii.  28);  whereas  the  accounts  them- 
selves display  great  freshness  and  variety.  Ruth  exhibits  in  its 
last  five  verses  something  of  the  style  and  vocabulary  of  P  ;^  but 
these  may  have  been  added  by  an  exilic  or  post-exilic  writer  to 
a  composition  of  pre-exilic  times.  It  is  obviously  of  later  origin 
than  the  reign  of  David  to  whom  it  refers  (iv.  17),  and  one 
of  the  customs  described  in  the  narrative  is  expressly  stated  to 
have  obtained  in  for??ier  times  (iv.  7) ;  but  more  positive  and 
precise  indications  of  its  date  are  absent.  In  the  Hebrew  Bible 
it  is  not  attached  to  fudges  but  is  comprised  within  the  group  of 
writings  which  was  the  last  to  be  included  in  the  Canon.  In 
I  Sam.  a  number  of  narratives  fall  (as  will  appear  later)'-^into  two 
series  which  are  sometimes  difficult  to  harmonise  with  one 
another,  and  seem  to  be  variant  representations  of  the  same  facts 
composed  by  different  authors  at  different  dates ;  whilst  in  2  Stwt. 
the  existence  of  more  than  one  account  of  the  reign  of  David, 
deaUng  with  different  sides  of  it,  is  suggested  by  the  two 
summaries  of  his  officers  in  viii.  15  foil,  and  xx.  23  foil.  In  the 
books  of  Kings  a  collection  of  graphic  stories  (many  of  them 
relating  particularly  to  the  prophets  Elijah  and  Elisha)  is  inserted 
in  the  middle  of  a  compendious  chronicle  of  the  kings  of  Israel 
and  Judah,  which  is  marked  by  recurrent  phrases  similar  to  those 
just  noticed  in  Judges.  But  the  process  followed  in  the  forma- 
tion of  Jud.-Kgs.  differs  from  that  pursued  in  the  Hexateuch. 
In  this  the  earlier  documents  employed  appear  to  have  been 
welded  together  into  a  fairly  harmonious  whole  with  a  minimum 
of  additions  from  the  hand  of  the  compiler  or  compilers.  In  the 
succeeding  books,  the  contributions  of  the  compiler  are  more 
extensive,    for   to   him    are    probably    due   the   moralising   and 

^  Cf.  Gen.  xi.  lO  foil.,  where  the  same  form  (Heb.)  of  the  verb  to  beget  is 
used.  2  5gg  pp  216,  221,  224,  etc. 


lO  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

annalistic  sections,  marked  by  stereotyped  phrases,  which  are 
so  large  an  element  of  them.  The  compilation  seems  to  have 
been  made  after  the  production  of  Deuteronomy  (for  the  passages 
assigned  to  the  compiler  generally  resemble  that  book  in  spirit 
and  diction),^  but  prior  to  the  Exile  (since  passages  like  /  Kg. 
xii.  19,  2  Kg.  xvii.  18,  23  must  have  been  written  in  Palestine 
while  Judah  was  still  a  kingdom).^  But  as  the  last  chapter  of 
2  Kg.  records  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  deportation  of  the 
Jews  to  Babylon  (see  also  xvii.  19-20)  this  book  must  have  been 
supplemented  during  the  Exile,  at  which  time  some  small 
additions  were  made  to  the  other  books  likewise.^  In  the  books 
of  Samuel  the  compiler's  own  hand  is  less  discernible  than  in  the 
books  immediately  preceding  and  following. 

1,  2  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah.  The  books  of  Chronicles^ 
Ezra,  and  Nehemiah  all  form  one  connected  work.  Not  only 
are  the  two  last  verses  of  2  Chron.  identical  with  the  opening 
verses  of  Ezra^  but  they  end  in  the  middle  of  a  sentence,  the 
conclusion  of  which  only  occurs  in  Ez.  i.  3 ;  whilst  by  Josephus* 
and  in  the  Talmud  Ez.  and  Neh.  must  have  been  counted  as  one 
book.  As  has  been  stated,  a  passage  in  Chronicles  implies  that  it 
is  not  earlier  than  340  B.C.*  With  this  agrees  the  reference  in 
Nehemiah  xii.  11,  22,  to  Jaddua,  who  was  high-priest  in  the  time 
of  Darius  Codomannus  335-330  and  Alexander  {ZZ^-Z^Z)-     I" 

*  e.g.  he  {they)  did  that  which  was  right  {evil)  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah  ;  cf.  p.  6. 
'  The  incidental  observations  respecting  the  Judaean  ownership  of  Beer- 

sheba  and  Bethshemesh  in  /  /ig.  xix,  3,  2  Kg.  xiv.  11,  which  convey  the  same 
implication,  occur  in  sections  which  do  not  proceed  from  the  compiler  but 
have  been  incorporated  by  him  from  earlier  sources. 

'  Features  characteristic  of  the  Priestly  Code  occur  \n  Jud.  xx.,  xxi.  (see 
p.  192),  I  Kg.  viii.  1-5  (p.  304) ;  cf.  also  /  Kg.  iv.  24  marg. 

*  In  Cont.  Ap.  i.  8  he  states  that  the  Jews  possessed  only  22  books,  of 
which  5  contained  the  laws  of  Moses  and  the  tradition  of  the  origin  of  man- 
kind up  to  the  time  of  Moses'  death,  13  contained  the  history  of  the  nation 
from  Moses  till  the  reign  of  the  Persian  King  Artaxerxes,  and  the  remaining 
4  consisted  of  hymns  to  God  and  directions  for  the  conduct  of  human  life. 
The  22  books  are  generally  reckoned  to  be  (1-5)  the  five  books  of  Moses, 
(6)  Joshua,  (7)  Judges  and  Ruth,  (8)  Samuel,  (9)  Kings,  (10)  Chronicles, 
(11)  Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  {12)  Esther,  (13)  Job,  (14)  the  xii.  Minor  Prophets, 
(15)  Isaiah,  (i6)  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations,  (17)  Ezckiel,  (18)  Daniel, 
(19)  the  Psalms,  (20)  Proverbs,  (21)  Ecclesiastes,  (22)  the  Song  of  Songs. 

'  That  it  was  written  in  the  Persian  or  Greek  periods  appears  further  from 
the  mention  of  darics  or  droihintB  in  /  Ch.  xxix.  7. 


rNTRODUCTION  ii 

Chronicles^  as  has  been  said,  there  are  incorporated  sections 
of  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  ;  whilst  in  the  books  of  Ezra 
and  Nehemiah  portions  of  the  memoirs  of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah 
(marked  by  the  use  of  the  ist  person  sing.)  are  embodied  (e.g. 
Ez,  vii.  27-ix.  15,  Neh,  i.-vii). 

Esther.  This  book,  which  professes  to  relate  an  incident 
in  the  reign  of  the  Persian  Xerxes  (485-465  b.c),  must  neces- 
sarily have  been  written  as  late  as  that  date ;  but  as  the  opening 
words  suggest  that  the  days  of  Xerxes  were  long  past,  the  book  is 
generally  assigned  to  the  Greek  period  and  held  to  be  subse- 
quent to  330  B.C.     A  more  precise  conclusion  is  unattainable. 

The  analysis,  however,  of  so  many  of  the  O.T.  histories  into 
their  component  parts  does  not  exhaust  the  inquiry :  it  remains 
to  determine  upon  what  sources  of  information  the  latter  were 
dependent.  Contemporary  written  sources  were  forthcoming 
in  abundance  for  some  of  the  later  periods  described;  and 
explicit  references  to  such  are  not  infrequent  in  the  books 
relating  to  the  Monarchy  and  the  Return.  For  the  earlier 
periods,  when  direct  allusions  fail,  we  have,  in  estimating  the 
character  of  the  materials  from  which  the  history  has  been 
derived,  to  be  guided  by  general  considerations.  In  this  con- 
nection it  is  important  to  observe  that  the  evidence  for  the 
practice  of  writing  at  a  certain  date  by  one  people  does  not 
prove,  or  necessarily  render  probable,  the  use  of  the  same  by 
another  people  living  under  different  circumstances.  The  preva- 
lence of  literary  habits  and  the  creation  of  documentary  records 
imply  settled  life  and  some  measure  of  culture.  Where  these 
conditions  have  been  absent,  it  is  not  likely  that  the  art  of 
writing,  if  known,  could  be  largely  practised,  or  written 
memorials,  available  for  the  future  historian,  produced. 

For  the  ages  previous  to  the  Call  of  Abraham  historic  data 
must  have  been  altogether  lacking.  The  account  given  of  these 
in  the  opening  chapters  of  Genesis  obviously  partakes  of  the 
nature  of  the  stories  by  which  early  races  everywhere  have  en- 
deavoured to  explain  the  origin  of  the  universe.  As  will  be  seen, 
they  have  many  points  of  likeness  to  those  which  are  known  to 


13  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

have  been  current  in  Assyria  and  Babylonia,  The  times  when 
the  Hebrews  came  into  contact  with  the  Empires  of  the  East 
were  not  confined  to  the  8th  and  7th  centuries  B.C.  or  the  period 
of  the  Exile.  Babylonian  influence  had  penetrated  into  Palestine 
in  the  15th  century  B.C.  (as  appears  from  certain  tablets  found 
at  Tell-el-Amarna,  in  Egypt),^  and  there  seems  no  reason  for 
questioning  the  trustworthiness  of  the  belief  that  the  ancestors  of 
the  Hebrew  race  themselves  came  at  a  still  remoter  date  from 
Babylonia.  The  difference  in  substance  and  spirit  discernible 
in  certain  of  the  parallel  narratives  in  the  beginning  of  Genesis 
suggests  that  the  materials  of  them  were  adapted  and  shaped 
by  the  Hebrews  at  distinct  periods,  some  perhaps  being  either 
appropriated  or  worked  up  in  the  time  of  the  Exile,  whilst  others 
may  date  back  as  far  as  one  of  the  two  earlier  occasions  just 
indicated.  In  regard  to  patriarchal  times,  certain  poems  and 
lays  were  current,  which  have  been  incorporated  by  the  writers 
of  the  histories:  such  are  those  relating  to  Lamech  {Gen.  iv. 
23,  24),  Noah  (ix.  25-27),  Rebekah  (xxv.  23),  and  Isaac  (xxvii. 
27-29,  39-40),  and  the  so-called  Blessing  of  Jacob  (xlix.  2-27). 
It  is  not  probable,  however,  that  all  of  these  really  proceed  from 
this  period;  and  the  bulk  of  the  patriarchal  narratives  can 
scarcely  rest  upon  any  other  basis  than  tradition.  A  body  of 
shepherds,  such  as  the  ancestors  of  the  Hebrews  avowedly  were, 
are  not  likely  to  have  drawn  up  and  preserved  written  records  of 
themselves ;  and  certain  features  of  the  narratives  (the  derivation 
of  the  Hebrew  people  and  their  kin  from  a  single  ancestor,  and 
the  precise  genealogical  tables  of  their  descent)  suggest  that 
they  are  in  some  degree  the  product  of  an  imaginative  treatment 
of  traditional  material.  Of  the  life  of  Abraham,  however,  one 
incident  is  brought  into  connection  with  a  Babylonian  king 
{Gen.  xiv.  i),  to  whose  reign  certain  inscriptions  recently  dis- 
covered relate;  and  some  features  in  the  account  of  it  may  be 
drawn  from  Babylonian  sources,  though  whether  obtained  in 
Babylon  or  Palestine  is  uncertain.  And,  in  addition,  some  of 
the  facts  in  the  career  of  Joseph  (e.g.  Gen.  xlvii.  13-27)  may 
repose  on  more  secure  ground  than  the  rest ;  for  not  only  are 
they  in  point  of  time  the  most  recent  in  the  patriarchal  history, 

*  170  miles  S.  of  Cairo. 


INTRODUCTION  13 

but  the  scene  of  them  is  Egypt,  where  the  memory  of  the  past 
was  systematically  preserved.^ 

In  the  times  of  Moses  and  Joshua,  as  in  the  preceding  age, 
the  situation  of  the  Hebrews,  recently  escaped  from  bondage, 
does  not  favour  the  belief  that  they  produced  many  memorials 
of  themselves.  They  had,  however,  in  their  leader  Moses  one 
who  had  been  reared  in  the  house  of  an  Egyptian  princess  and 
probably  trained  in  Egyptian  learning  (JSx.  ii.  10);  and  if  he 
was  acquainted  with  the  art  of  writing  (as  he  may  well  have 
been)  it  is  sufficiently  likely  that  he  used  it.  And  actual  mention 
is  made  of  records  drawn  up  by  him  in  connection  with  the  feud 
with  Amalek  (Ex.  xvii.  14),  the  Sinaitic  legislation  (Ex.  xxiv.  4,  7), 
a  list  of  stations  passed  in  the  Wanderings  {Num.  xxxiii.  2,  P),  and 
the  repetition  of  the  Law  before  his  death  (Dent.  xxxi.  9,  24). 
But  the  laws  formulated  in  the  several  parts  of  the  Pentateuch, 
together  with  their  respective  contents,  exhibit,  as  has  been 
shown,  signs  of  belonging  to  a  later  date  than  the  Mosaic  age; 
so  that  if  they  embody  Mosaic  writings,  it  is  impossible  to  dis- 
tinguish them.  Moreover,  the  Mosaic  legal  system  appears  to 
have  originated  in  judgments  given  by  word  of  mouth  to  dis- 
putants (Ex.  xviii.  13),  such  oral  decisions  being  converted  into 
written  statutes  at  a  subsequent  period.  The  experiences  of 
the  Exodus  and  the  Wanderings  (which  occupy  the  narrative 
parts  of  the  Pentateuch)  and  those  attending  the  conquest  of 
Canaan  (related  in  Joshua)  were  sufficiently  impressive  to  be  re- 
tained (in  outline)  in  the  memory,  apart  from  documentary 
records  \  but  the  many  discrepancies  manifested  in  the  different 
sources  of  the  Hexateuch  indicate  that  much  uncertainty  pre- 
vailed as  to  details,  which  were  in  consequence  handled  with 
some  freedom.  Particular  incidents  became  the  subject  of  songs 
and  poems,  such  as  that  attributed  to  Miriam  at  the  Passage  of 
the  Red  Sea  (Ex.  xv.  1-2 1).  This,  together  with  those  quoted 
in  Num.  xxi.  14-15,  17-18,  27-30,  and  others,  were  probably 

^  No  confirmation,  however,  of  the  history  of  Joseph  has  been  furnished 
by  the  Egyptian  monuments,  though  many  both  of  the  customs  and  of  the 
names  which  occur  in  it  find  illustration  from  them.  And  even  in  regard  to 
the  latter,  it  has  been  observed  that  parallels  to  them  are  in  general  derived 
from  monuments  relating  to  a  much  more  recent  time  than  the  supposed  age 
of  Joseph  (see  Driver  in  Authority  and  Archceology,  p.  52). 


14  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

at  first  preserved  orally,  and  committed  to  writing  at  a  later  date, 
certain  of  them  receiving  additions  in  the  course  of  transmission. 
Some  of  these  compositions  appear  to  have  been  eventually 
collected  in  a  book  entitled  The  Wars  of  Jehovah  {Num. 
xxi.  14).  Another  collection  of  similar  poems  was  the  Book  oj 
Jashar  {Josh.  x.  13).  The  name  of  this  probably  has  reference 
to  Israel  "the  righteous"  (cf.  Jeshurun^  Deut.  xxxii.  15,  xxxiii.  5, 
2  Is.  xliv.  2),  its  contents  consisting  of  songs  in  praise  of 
Israelite  heroes.  The  date  of  the  latter  collection,  from  the  fact 
that  it  comprised  David's  elegy  on  Saul  and  Jonathan  (2  Sam. 
i.  18),  could  not  be  earlier  than  David's  time.^ 

The  narratives  in  the  book  ol  Judges  were  presumably  derived 
in  the  main  from  poems  and  stories  ^  respecting  local  heroes 
which  circulated  among  the  several  tribes.  Such  poems  and 
stories  were  not  always  constant  in  the  matter  of  details ;  and 
this  want  of  fixity  explains  some  unimportant  discrepancies  in 
the  existing  accounts.  But  that  these  accounts  are  in  the  main 
trustworthy  may  be  inferred  from  a  comparison  of  one  of  them 
(c.  iv.)  with  the  evidence  supplied  by  the  Song  of  Deborah  (c.  v.) 
which  appears  to  be  contemporary  with  the  events  it  relates.^ 
With  the  establishment  of  the  Monarchy  Israel  entered  upon 
a  more  settled  period  of  history;  and  from  the  rise  of  national 
sentiment  and  the  development  of  national  resources  the  rise  of 
a  national  literature  may  plausibly  be  dated.  As  the  people 
advanced  in  culture  and  civilisation,  both  the  materials  for  history 
and  the  ability  to  use  them  would  increase.  Alike  at  the  courts 
of  the  kings  (amongst  whose  officials  a  Recorder  is  mentioned, 
2  Sam.  viii.  16,  7  Kg.  iv.  3,  2  Kg.  xviii.  18),  at  the  Temple  at 
Jerusalem  (where  registers  and  genealogies  were  kept),  and  in 
prophetic  circles,  numerous  sources  of  information  must  have 
accumulated.  And  that  these  were  utilised  by  annalists  is  clear 
from  the  titles  of  the  works  adduced  as  authorities  in  the  books 

^  It  may  even  be  later  than  the  reign  of  Solomon  ;  see  the  LXX.  of 
I  Kg.  viii.  12  (53)  where  the  words  iv  /3i^\/(^  t^s  ^5^5  have  been  conjectured 
to  be  an  error  for  in  the  book  of  Jashar  (the  Hebrew  for  the  two  phrases 
diflFering  but  slightly). 

*  Yet  it  is  implied  m  fud.  viii.  14  (marg.)  that  a  knowledge  of  writing 
was  possessed  by  even  ordinary  individuals  during  this  period. 

'  But  see  p.  199. 


INTRODUCTION  15 

of  Kiftgs  and  Chronicles.  The  former  mentions  three  works  (or 
perhaps  three  sections  of  one  work),  "the  Acts  of  Solomon" 
(z  Kg.  xi.  41),  "the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Israel"  (z  Kg. 
xiv.  19,  etc.),  and  "  the  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  "  (/  Kg. 
xiv.  29),  which  would  seem  to  have  been  based  on  the  public 
archives.^  The  latter  refers  to  a  similar  work  bearing  the  title  of 
"  the  Book  of  the  Kings  of  Israel  and  Judah  "  (or  its  equivalent 
— see  2  Ch.  xxvii.  7,  xvi.  11,  xxxiii.  18)  ;2  and  also  cites  either  as 
independent  authorities,  or  as  embodied  in  the  book  just  named,^ 
the  writings  of  certain  prophets,  Samuel,  Nathan,  Gad,  Ahijah, 
Shemaiah,  Iddo,  Jehu,  and  Isaiah.*  And  many  of  the  lists  of 
names  which  appear  in  Chronicles^  Ezra^  and  Nehemiah  must 
be  due  to  compilations  of  the  priests,  begun  before  the  Exile 
and  continued  subsequently. 

The  completion  and  final  revision  of  the  historical  books 
of  the  O.T.  occurred  (as  has  been  said)  at  a  comparatively 
late  date,  at  a  time  when  the  consciousness  of  a  Divine  purpose 
manifesting  itself  in  Hebrew  history  had  become  mature.  To 
this  fact  are  owing  two  characteristics  of  this  class  of  writings. 
In  the  first  place,  the  interest  of  their  writers  was  with  the 
religious  rather  than  with  the  secular  side  of  their  nation's  annals; 
and  this  affected  not  only  their  choice  of  subject-matter,^  but 
their  treatment  of  it,  so  that  they  were  less  concerned  to  trace 
the  causes,  than  to  draw  the  moral,  of  the  events  described.  In 
the  second  place,  in  their  view  of  the  earlier  stages  of  the  history 
they  were  influenced  by  their  knowledge  of  the  later,  but  having 
an  imperfect  apprehension  of  the  gradualness  with  which  impHcit 
principles  receive  explicit  expression  in  the  course  of  historical 
evolution,  they  were  not  content  to  leave  the  accounts  of  the 
rudimentary  phases  of  their  countrymen's  religious  development 

*  That  they  were  not  themselves  official  documents  appears  from  the  char- 
acter of  the  reference  in  /  Kg.  xvi.  20,  2  Kg.  xv.  15. 

^  In  2  Ch.  xxxiii.  18  mention  is  made  of  "the  prayer  of  Manasseh"  as 
being  recorded  in  "the  acts  of  the  kings  of  Israel,"  and  as  it  finds  no  place 
in  the  history  of  Manasseh  in  2  Kg.  xxi.  1-18,  the  latter  work  cannot  be  re- 
ferred to.  3  See  2  Ch.  xx.  34. 

*  See  I  Ch.  xxix.  29,  2  Ch.  ix.  29,  xii.  15,  xx.  34,  xxxii.  32. 

"*  For  information  which  they  are  not  interested  in  supplying  they  frequently 
send  their  readers  to  the  historical  works  mentioned  above  as  their  authorities 
(see  especially  /  Kg.  xiv.  19,  xxii.  39). 


i6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  be  read  in  the  light  of  the  sequel,  but  were  inclined  to 
rewrite  them  and  adapt  them  to  the  condition  of  things  that 
afterwards  prevailed.  This  inclination  to  introduce  the  practices 
and  ideas  of  contemporary  times  or  of  the  immediate  past  into 
the  description  of  a  remote  period  is  indisputable  in  the  books  of 
Chronicks;  for  by  the  side  of  these  the  earlier  books  of  Kings 
have  been  preserved,  and  the  difference  between  their  representa- 
tions is  too  pronounced  to  escape  notice.  But  though  this  is 
the  only  case  in  the  O.T.  where  two  separate  works  upon 
the  same  subject  are  available  for  comparison,  it  is  probable 
that  the  same  tendency  has  been  at  work  in  other  instances ;  and 
the  existing  accounts  of  the  Patriarchal  and  Mosaic  ages  in 
particular  contain  features  which  (as  has  been  indicated)  find  on 
such  an  hypothesis  their  best  explanation. 

II.  Those  of  the  O.T.  books  which  are  not  professedly  histories 
but  poems,  prophecies,  or  philosophical  compositions  are  of 
importance  to  the  study  of  O.T.  history  from  the  light  which 
they  throw  upon  the  social,  moral,  and  religious  conditions  of 
the  age  which  produced  them.  What  this  was,  however,  cannot 
always  be  ascertained  with  certainty,  since  in  the  absence  of 
trustworthy  traditions  it  has  to  be  inferred  from  the  general 
standpoint  of  the  writer  or  from  his  specific  allusions  to  persons 
or  events  of  known  date.  In  some  instances  the  only  clue  is  the 
character  of  the  subject-matter,  linking  them  to  compositions  whose 
age  is  otherwise  fixed ;  but  it  is  obvious  that  writings  which  are 
assigned  to  a  particular  time  solely  on  the  ground  of  the  beliefs  and 
sentiments  which  they  express  cannot,  without  a  peiiiio  priticipii^ 
be  used  to  illustrate  the  characteristic  ideas  of  that  time. 

The  non-historical  books  may  be  divided  into  (i.)  Poetical, 
(ii.)  Didactic,  (iii.)  Prophetical.  To  the  first  belong  the  Psalms,  Job, 
and  the  Song  of  Songs;  to  the  second.  Proverbs  and  Ecdesiastes ; 
and  to  the  third  the  Major  and  Minor  Prophets. 

The  Psalms.  Of  the  Psalms,  which  number  150,  a  large 
proportion  are  connected,  in  the  titles  prefixed  to  them,  with 
the  names  of  various  individuals,  viz.  Moses  (i),  David  (73), 
Solomon  (2),  the  sons  of  Korah  (11,  including  one  to  which 
the  name  of  Heman  is  also  attached),  Asaph  (12),  and  Ethan  (i); 


INTRODUCTION  17 

whilst  of  the  Psalms  bearing  the  name  of  David,  some  are 
associated  with  particular  incidents  in  his  Hfetime.  But  the 
contents  of  many  of  these  last  are  inconsistent  with  the  state- 
ments in  the  titles.  In  v.  7,  xxvii.  4,  and  Ixv.  4,  the  allusion  to 
a  teifiph  does  not  suit  David's  reign  (though  the  term  is  used  of 
the  sanctuary  at  Shiloh).^  In  li.,  which  in  the  title  is  brought 
into  relation  with  David's  intrigue  with  Bathsheba,  the  writer 
is  conscious  (ver.  4)  of  sin  against  God  only  (not  man),  and 
the  closing  verses  are  a  prayer  for  the  building  of  the  walls  of 
Jerusalem.  Psalm  xxxiv.,  which  is  assigned  to  the  time  when 
David  feigned  madness  at  the  court  of  Gath  (7  Sam.  xxi.  13), 
is  avowedly  intended  to  give  instruction  in  the  fear  of  Jehovah 
(ver.  1 1  foil.).  In  lix.,  which  the  title  connects  with  Saul's  attempt 
to  kill  David  at  his  own  house  (z  Sam.  xix.  11),  the  prayer  to 
God  to  arise  and  visit  the  nations  (ver.  5,  8)  is  inappropriate  to 
the  s'lpposed  situation.  In  these  cases  the  value  of  the  titles  is 
discredited,  and  doubt,  in  consequence,  is  cast  upon  others  which 
are  not  so  obviously  in  error.  The  internal  evidence,  however, 
though  sufficing  to  disprove  many  of  the  conclusions  expressed 
in  the  titles,  is  for  the  most  part  too  vague  to  supply  others 
as  precise  but  more  correct.  Nevertheless  there  is  great 
probability  that  some  psalms  proceed  from  David,  though  much 
uncertainty  as  to  which  they  arc,^  xviii.  and  xxiv.  perhaps  having 
as  good  a  claim  as  any  to  be  considered  his.  Others,  by  their 
allusions  to  the  king,  may  have  been  composed  at  any  time 
within  the  period  of  the  monarchy  (ii.,  xx.,  xxi.,  xlv.,  Ixi.,  Ixiii., 
Ixxii.);  and  to  these  should  be  added  xlvi.-xlviii.,  Ixxv.,  Ixxvi., 
the  language  of  which,  though  more  or  less  suitable  to  any 
occasion  when  the  nation  had  experienced  a  great  deliverance, 
is  peculiarly  appropriate  to  the  time  of  Sennacherib's  over- 
throw in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah.  Many  are  fixed,  by  their 
allusions  to  the  captive  and  distressed  condition  of  the  people 
and  the  desolation  of  the  Temple,  to  the  Exile  or  to  some  later 
calamity  like  the  persecution  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (168  B.C.), 
which  roused  the  resistance  of  the  Maccabees  (Ixxiv.,  Ixxix.,  Ixxx., 
lxxxix.).3    Ps.  cxxvi.  expresses  the  outburst  of  joy  excited  by  the 

^  See  /  Sam.  i.  9  and  p.  280.  ^  Cf.  p.  276. 

•  It  has  been  questioned  whether  the  Canon  of  the  O.T.  was  not  closed 


i8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Return  from  captivity;  whilst  Ixxxv.  seems  to  reflect  the  de- 
spondency which  afterwards  supervened.  A  certain  number 
of  psalms  are  liturgical  in  character  (cxv.,  cxxxv.),  and  these 
must  proceed  from  times  when  the  Temple  services  were  carefully 
organised.  It  is  not,  however,  improbable  that  many  which 
exhibit  traces  of  late  origin  contain  an  earlier  nucleus,  old 
material  having  been  adapted  to  subsequent  needs.  The 
alterations  and  combinations  to  which  writings  of  this  kind 
were  liable  is  clearly  evidenced  by  a  comparison  of  cviii.  with  Ivii, 
and  \x.,  and  of  Ixx.  with  xl. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  follows  that  the  present  collection  of  the 
Psalms  was  the  work  of  post-exilic  times.  But  that  earlier  collections  once 
existed,  which  were  afterwards  incorporated  in  the  later,  is  suggested  by 
certain  internal  features.  The  arrangement  into  five  books  might,  if  it  stood 
by  itself,  be  reasonably  held  to  be  the  work  of  the  editor ;  but  the  fact  that 
the  sections  correspond  only  approximately,  not  exactly,  with  the  natural 
divisions  into  which  the  contents  fall,  points  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
existed  as  independent  aggregates  before  the  time  of  the  final  editor,  and  that 
they  were,  in  some  respects,  modified  by  him.^ 

Job.  The  book  of  fob,  which  is  a  philosophical  drama  or 
dialogue,  is  ascribed  in  the  Talmud  to  Moses ;  but  it  is  highly 
improbable  that  in  the  Mosaic  age  there  could  have  been  pro- 
duced a  work  marked  by  the  artistic  form  and  profound  thought 
oi  Job.  Precise  allusions,  however,  for  determining  its  date  are 
wanting,  though  the  references  to  the  worship  of  the  sun  and 
moon  (xxxi.  26-28),  with  which  the  Hebrews  seem  to  have 
become  familiar  for  the  first  time  in  the  closing  years  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom  {2  Kg.  xvii.  16),  suggest  that  it  was  com- 
posed not  earlier  than  the  end  of  the  8th  or  the  beginning  of  the 
7th  century  B.C.  But  if  account  be  taken  of  the  stage  of 
philosophical  reflection  reached  in  it,  a  later  date  than  this  is 

too  soon  for  psalms  of  the  Maccabean  period  to  be  inserted  in  it,  the  writer 
of  Ecclus.  implying  that  in  his  time  {c.  133  B.C.)  there  existed  a  translation  of 
"the  law,  the  prophecies,  and  the  rest  of  the  books,"  which  suggests  an 
earlier  date  than  168  for  the  originals  from  which  the  translation  was  made. 
But  the  statement  leaves  uncertain  (i)  what  "the  rest  of  the  books"  com- 
prised, (2)  whether,  if  the  Psalter  was  included,  it  was  the  existing  collection 
or  an  earlier  one  (see  the  next  paragraph). 

^  Bks.  i.  and  ii.  consist  mainly  of  alleged  Davidic  psalms,  and  bk.  ii. 
concludes  with  the  statement  "The  prayers  of  David  the  son  of  Jesse  are 
ended,"  whereas  in  reality  these  two  books  do  not  include  all  the  reputed 
Davidic  psalms,  whilst  they  comprise  several  psalms  expressly  attributed  to 
other  writers  (Asaph,  Solomon,  and  the  sons  of  Korah). 


INTRODUCTION  19 

rendered  probable,  its  questionings  of  Divine  justice  bringing  it 

into  association  with  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  (6th  century  B.C.). 

And  there  are  some  features  which  point  to  a  later  date  even 

than  the  Exile,  since  the  only  parallels  for  the  character  of  Satan 

are  furnished  by  Zech.  iii.  i  and  i  Ch.  xxi.   i   (both  post-exilic 

writings),  whilst  the  expression  holy  ones  (v.  i,  xv.  15)  to  denote 

angelic  beings  appears  to  be  found  elsewhere  only  in  ^^  Zech." 

xiv.  5,  Fs.  Ixxxix.  7,  and  Dan.  viii.  13  (but  cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  2). 

The  patriarch  who  is  the  subject  of  the  book  was,  no  doubt,  an  actual 
personage,  who  was  represented  either  in  history  or  tradition  as  distinguished 
both  for  his  piety  (cf.  Ezek.  xiv.  14,  20)  and  his  prosperity  ;  but,  as  the  symmetry 
which  obtains  between  his  losses  and  his  recompense  (i.  2,  3,  xlii.  12,  13) 
suggests,  the  historical  or  traditional  matter  has  been  freely  handled  by  the 
poet.     Uz,  the  native  land  of  Job,  is  associated  with  Edom  in  Lam.  iv.  21. 

Song  of  Songs.  The  Song  of  Songs^  a  love  poem,  is  either  a 
drama  or  a  collection  of  lyrics  sung  at  bridal  festivals.  It  bears 
the  name  of  Solomon  (i.  i);  but  certain  peculiarities  of  diction 
have  led  to  its  being  assigned  either  to  the  time  of  the  Monarchy 
after  the  division  of  the  Kingdom,  or  to  the  period  after  the 
Exile. 

Proverbs.  Proverbs  consists  of  several  collections  of  pro- 
verbial sayings  and  maxims,  which  are  respectively  attributed  to 
(i)  Solomon  (i.  i-xxii.  16  (or  x.  i-xxii.  16^)  and  xxv.-xxix.,  the 
latter  being  stated  to  have  been  **  copied  out "  by  "  the  men  of 
Hezekiah  ") :  (2)  "  the  wise  "  (xxii.  17-xxiv.  22  and  xxiv.  23-end): 
(3)  Agur  the  son  of  Jakeh,  of  Massa^  (c.  xxx.) :  (4)  Lemuel 
king  of  Massa,  "  which  his  mother  taught  him  "  (c.  xxxi.).  The 
final  combination  of  these  collections  into  one  book  was  prob- 
ably effected  at  a  late  date  (after  the  Exile),  as  one  of  the 
collections  is  said  by  scholars  to  contain  traces  of  Aramaic.  But 
the  bulk  of  the  book  is  doubtless  old;  and  apart  from  the 
evidence  supplied  by  the  title  in  xxv.  i,  the  numerous  allusions 
to  the  king  (xvi.  10  foil.,  xix.  12,  xx.  8,  26,  28)  show  that  parts 
must  proceed  from  the  time  of  the  Monarchy.  Probably  many 
of  the  proverbs  come  from  Solomon  himself  (cf.  i  Kg.  iv.  32) ;  but 
it  is  not  likely  that  all  that  are  ascribed  to  him  are  really  his, 

*  C.  i.-ix.  are  generally  regarded  as  an  introduction   to  the   Solomonic 
collection  x.  i-xxii.  16. 
'  See  Gen.  xxv.  14. 


20  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

since  some  are  of  a  tenor  rather  inconsistent  with  his  policy  and 
habits  {d.g.  xxi.  31,  xxii.  14). 

Ecclesiastes.  Ecclesiastes^  professes  (seemingly)  to  be  the 
work  of  Solomon  (i.  i) ;  but  its  ascription  to  him  is  probably 
only  a  literary  device,  for  neither  the  description  of  the  pre- 
valence of  oppression  (iii.  16,  iv.  i,  v.  8,  cf.  also  x.  5),  which 
reflects  severely  upon  the  character  of  the  ruler,  nor  the  counsel 
relating  to  the  conduct  of  a  subject  towards  the  king  (viii.  2  foil., 
X.  20)  is  consistent  with  the  book  being  the  composition  of  one 
who  was  himself  a  sovereign.  Still  less  compatible  with  its 
alleged  authorship  is  its  diction,  which  points  to  its  being  one 
of  the  latest  books  of  the  O.T.  and  therefore  post-exilic.  But 
whether  it  belongs  to  the  Persian  or  to  the  still  later  Greek  period 
is  a  question  which  is  not  easily  determined,  and  turns  partly 
upon  the  social  conditions  it  contemplates,  and  partly  upon  the 
parallels  it  offers  to  certain  Greek  philosophical  systems. 

Unlike  the  personal  names  borne  by  some  of  the  Historical 
books,  those  attached  to  the  Prophetical  books  are,  with  two  or 
three  exceptions,  the  names  of  their  authors;  and  in  the  case 
of  the  majority  the  age  to  which  they  belong  is  known  from  in- 
formation supplied  by  the  histories,  or  from  statements  prefixed 
to  the  prophecies  themselves  and  confirmed  by  the  evidence  of 
their  contents.  But  in  a  certain  number  of  instances  the  date  is 
ascertainable  from  the  internal  evidence  only,  and  this  is  of  a 
conflicting  character.  And  even  of  those  books  whose  author- 
ship is  known,  there  are  longer  or  shorter  passages  which  differ 
so  widely  both  in  substance  and  form  from  their  context  that  it  is 
difficult  to  beheve  that  they  can  proceed  from  the  same  hand  j 
and  the  origin  of  such  sections  has  likewise  to  be  determined 
from  their  writers'  standpoint  and  allusions.  But  some  un- 
certainty is  inseparable  from  inferences  drawn  from  these  data. 
In  the  first  place  when  one  country  was  absorbed  by  another  as 
the  result  of  conquest,  the  conqueror  could  be  described  as  king 
of  the  subject  territory  equally  with  the  previous  native  ruler 

^  Ecclesiastes  is  the  LXX.  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  Kokeleth^  meaning 
**  a  member  of  an  assembly,"  and  so  "  a  debater." 


INTRODUCTION  21 

(see  2  Kg.  xxiii.  29,  Ez.  v.  13,  vi.  22),  so  that  under  the  same 
expressions  a  great-  change  in  the  historical  situation  might  be 
concealed.  Secondly,  the  prophets  embraced  within  their  mental 
view  not  only  the  past  but  the  future,  and  blended  together  the 
real  and  the  ideal,  so  that  it  is  frequently  a  question  of  no  little 
perplexity  to  decide  whether  the  circumstances  they  depict  repre- 
sent an  actually  existing  state  of  affairs  or  only  a  forecast  of  one 
still  to  come.  When  a  particular  standpoint  is  steadily  main- 
tained for  a  long  space,  it  may  reasonably  be  regarded  as  por- 
traying the  conditions  under  which  the  prophet  was  living  at  the 
time  he  wrote :  but  where  short  passages  are  concerned,  much 
doubt  is  inevitable. 

Isaiah.  Isaiah  was  a  native  of  Judah,  and  seems  to  have  been 
born  in  the  reign  of  Uzziah,  in  the  year  of  whose  death  he 
received  the  first  call  to  his  prophetic  work  (vi.  i).  He  lived 
through  the  reigns  of  Jotham  and  Ahaz,  and  at  least  part  of  that 
of  Hezekiah,  his  latest  prophecies  relating  to  the  invasion  of 
Judah  by  Sennacherib  in  701  b.c.  Whether  he  survived 
Hezekiah  is  not  known  for  certain ;  but  tradition  affirms  that 
he  lived  till  the  reign  of  Manasseh  by  whom  he  was  put  to 
death. 

Certain  sections  of  the  book  of  Isaiah  are  so  unlike  the  rest 
of  it  that  they  may  plausibly  be  assigned  to  another  writer  or 
writers,  the  reason  which  has  led  to  their  being  attached  to  the 
authentic  productions  of  Isaiah  being  perhaps  convenience  in 
copying  or  arranging  manuscripts.  These  sections  are  xiii.  i- 
xiv.  23  ;  xxiv.-xxvii. ;  xxxiv.-xxxv. ;  and  xl.-lxvi. 

The  most  important  of  these  is  xl.-lxvi.  Between  this  section 
and  the  acknowledged  writings  of  Isaiah  there  is  great  dis- 
similarity both  in  standpoint  and  style.  Here  the  writer  assumes 
that  the  nation  is  in  exile  (Ixiv.  10),  and  contemplates  its  restora- 
tion from  it  in  consequence  of  the  destruction  of  Babylon,  which 
is  regarded  as  near  at  hand,  and  was  actually  effected  by  Cyrus 
the  Persian  in  538  B.C.  (see  xlv.  i).  The  Persian  king  is  already 
in  motion  (xlv.  1-2,  5) ;  and  the  prophet  in  consequence  appeals 
to  the  fulfilment  of  earlier  predictions  (presumably  some  relating 
to  Cyrus  and  the  successes  he  has  already  achieved)  as  accrediting 


22  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

the  new  announcements  which  he  proceeds  to  make  (xlii.  9, 
xlviii.  3-8).  Cyrus  who  was  King  of  Anshan  (a  district  within 
the  borders  of  Elam),  became  in  549  lord  of  the  Medes  and 
Persians  by  the  overthrow  of  Astyages;  and  the  reference  in 
xli.  25  to  one  coming  from  the  North  and  East  is  possibly  an 
allusion  to  the  union,  under  him,  of  these  two  nations,  and 
consequently  confines  the  date  of  the  section  within  the  interval 
between  549  and  538.  The  differences  in  style  between  this 
section  and  c.  i.-xxxix.  cannot  be  dealt  with  at  length  here :  it 
is  sufficient  to  name  one  or  two.  For  instance,  the  words  create 
and  all  flesh  are  common  in  c.  xl.-lxvi.  ;^  they  are  characteristic 
of  the  Priestly  narrative  of  the  Hexateuch^  which  has  been 
assigned  to  the  Exile ;  and  they  are  almost  entirely  absent  from 
c.  i.-xxxix.  (the  only  exception  being  iv.  5).  The  duplication  of 
an  emphatic  word  is  also  of  frequent  occurrence  in  xl.-lxvi.  (see 
xl.  I,  xlviii.  II,  li.  9,  12,  17,  lii.  i,  11,  Ivii.  6,  14,  19,  etc.);  but 
in  the  earlier  chapters  the  only  instances  are  viii.  9,  xxi.  9,  xxix.  i. 
The  section  is  generally  known  as  2  Isaiah, 

Within  the  last  eleven  chapters  of  this  section  (Ivi.-Ixvi.)  there  occur 
certain  passages  which  seem  to  imply  other  conditions  than  those  which  pre- 
vailed during  the  Exile.  Thus,  {a)  idolatry  of  a  Canaanite  type  is  practised, 
the  scenes  of  superstitious  rites  being  the  hills  and  torrent-valleys  of  Palestine 
(Ivii.  5-7,  Ixv.  7),  {b)  social  disorder  is  rife  (Ivii.  1-2,  Ixvi,  5),  {c)  the  founda- 
tion of  the  second  temple  has  been  planned,  but  the  reconstruction  of  it  is 
interrupted  by  the  malice  of  enemies  (Ixiii.  18,  cf.  Ixvi.  i),  {d)  the  pious  section 
of  the  community  is  weak,  but  it  is  to  be  shortly  strengthened  by  the  return 
of  many  Jews  who  are  still  scattered  abroad  These  features  seem  to  reflect 
the  conditions  that  existed  soon  after  the  Ketuni  (as  disclosed  in  Ezra  iv.  1-5, 
Hag..^  and  Zech.  i.-viii.)  circ.  536-520,  when  a  breach  occurred  between  the 
recently  returned  exiles  and  the  population  which  had  been  left  in  the  land, 
and  which  had  probably  become  semi-pagan  (cf.  the  description  of  the  people 
of  Samaria  in  2  Kgs.  xvii.  24-41).  But  some  assign  these  chapters  to  the 
time  of  Nehemiah  (5th  cent.),  and  designate  them  j  /r.' 

xiii.  i-xiv.  23,  which  announces  the  impending  fall  of  Babylon 
and  the  restoration  from  captivity  of  Jewish  prisoners,  is  expressly 
attributed  in  the  superscription  to  Isaiah,  and  contains  a  certain 
number  of  parallels  to  Isaianic  phraseology.    But  the  representa- 

*  For  create  or  creator  see  xl.  26,  28,  xli.  20,  xlii.  5,  xliii.  i,  7,  15,  xlv. 
7,  8,  12,  18,  xlviii.  7,  liv.  16,  Ivii.  19,  Ixv.  17,  18;  for  all  Jlesh  see  xl.  5,  6, 
xlix.  26,  Ixvi.  16,  23,  24. 

*  See  p.  5,  note. 

*  See  Cheyne,  Jewish  Religious  Life  after  the  Exile ^  p.  25. 


INTRODUCTION  23 

tion  of  Babylon's  destruction  as  near  (xiii.  22)  and  to  be  effected 
by  the  Medes  (xiii.  17)  suits  the  close  of  the  Exile  best. 

In  xxxiv.-xxxv.  the  absence  of  precise  references  makes  the 
occasion  of  its  composition  doubtful ;  but  the  hostility  displayed 
towards  Edom  (xxxiv.  5-6),  and  the  close  parallel  with  Ixiii.  1-6 
(cf.  also  Ezek.  xxv.  12-14),  again  renders  an  exilic  date  probable. 

Of  xxiv.-xxvii.  the  origin  is  highly  uncertain.  The  catastrophe 
described  relates  to  a  city  (not  a  country  like  Assyria,  the  foe 
of  Israel  in  Isaiah's  time),  which  may  be  Babylon,  in  which  case 
the  section  will  be  exilic  in  origin.  With  this  agrees  the  reference 
to  Moab  (xxv.  10)  which  finds  a  parallel  in  Ezck.  xxv.  8-1 1  ; 
and  there  are  some  features  of  likeness  to  Is,  xxxiv.-xxxv.  (just 
considered).  But  the  mention  of  this  mountain  (xxv.  6,  10) 
points  to  the  writer  being  in  Palestine ;  and  a  post-exilic  is  more 
probable  than  a  pre-exilic  date,  though  a  confident  assertion  is 
impossible.  If  post-exilic  and  belonging  to  the  Persian  age,  it 
is  variously  referred  to  the  reigns  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (521-485) 
and  Artaxerxes  Ochus  (358-337)  (see  pp.  469,  note,  487).^ 

Jeremiah.  Jeremiah  began  to  prophesy  in  the  thirteenth  year 
of  Josiah's  reign  (see  i.  2);  and  his  prophetic  activity  extended 
beyond  the  Fall  of  Jerusalem  (586  B.C.).  The  first  copy  of  his 
prophecies  was  written  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  (xxxvi. 
I,  2),  and  this  being  burnt,  a  second  was  made  in  the  following 
year;  so  that  the  chapters  of  the  book  which  relate  to  the 
earlier  years  of  his  activity  were  not  composed  contemporaneously 
with  the  events  to  which  they  refer. 

Two  sections  of  the  book,  if  not  more,  probably  proceed 
from  another  than  Jeremiah,  viz.  x.  1-16,  and  1.  i-li.  58.  The 
second  contemplates  an  attack  upon  Babylon  by  the  Medes 
(see  li.  11-28);  and  both  exhibit  parallels  in  thought  and  expres- 
sion to  2  Is,  They  may  consequently  be  assigned  to  the  Exile. 
A  part  of  the  second  section  (li.  15-19)  reproduces  x.  12-16. 

Lamentations.  Lamentations  in  the  Hebrew  has  no  name 
attached  to  it ;  but  in  the  LXX.  it  is  expressly  assigned  to  Jeremiah. 

^  Some  scholars  regard  xi.  10-16,  xii.,  and  xxi.  i-io  as  likewise  non- 
Isaianic  (pp.  428,  368,  notes).  C.  xv.  i-xvi.  12  is  almost  certainly  quoted 
by  Isaiah  from  an  earlier  unknown  prophet :  part  of  it  is  also  reproduced  by 
Jeremiah  (xlviii.  29  foil.). 


24  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  subject  (the  Fall  of  Jerusalem)  and  the  tone  of  the  poem 
are  generally  appropriate  to  the  situation  and  character  of 
Jeremiah ;  and  there  are  one  or  two  close  parallels  between  the 
writer's  account  of  himself  and  the  experiences  of  the  prophet 
(cf.  iii.  14,  53  vfith/er.  xx.  7,  xxxviii.  6).  But  the  language  used 
of  the  king  (Zedekiah)  in  iv.  20  seems  too  sympathetic  to  pro- 
ceed from  Jeremiah  (contrast  /er.  xxiv.  8),  and  the  writer 
identifies  himself  with  the  political  intrigues  of  the  time  more 
closely  than  Jeremiah  is  likely  to  have  done  (v.  6).  Moreover, 
the  fact  that  of  the  five  chapters,  or  poems,  of  which  the  book 
consists,  four  are  arranged  as  acrostics,  makes  it  difficult  to  think 
that  it  could  have  been  composed  by  a  prophet  of  Jeremiah's 
temperament ;  and  his  authorship  of  it  is  discountenanced  by  the 
circumstance  that  in  the  Heb.  Bible  it  does  not  appear  among 
the  prophetical  writings. 

Ezekiel.  Ezekiel  was  one  of  the  captives  who,  in  597,  were 
taken  to  Babylon  with  King  Jehoiachin,  and  who  found  a  home 
at  Tel  Abib  (iii.  15).  His  prophetic  call  took  place  in  592  (i.  2), 
soon  after  his  own  exile  began,  but  before  the  deportation  of  his 
countrymen  at  large;  and  consequently  some  of  his  writings 
reflect  the  conditions  and  ideas  of  the  time  preceding  the  Fall 
of  Jerusalem.  Others,  however,  were  produced  subsequently 
to  that  event,  and  more  strictly  belong  to  the  period  of  the  Exile. 
The  latest  of  them  dates  from  570  B.C.  (xxix.  17-21). 

Daniel.  The  book  of  Bam'e/,  which  in  the  English  Bible  is 
placed  with  the  prophetical  books,  is  not  counted  among  them 
in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.  The  narrative  element  is  much  more 
extensive  in  it  than  in  the  prophetical  writings  generally,  occupy- 
ing about  half  the  book:  in  this  Daniel  is  referred  to  in  the 
3rd  person ;  but  elsewhere  he  is  represented  as  writing  in  the  ist. 
The  book  professes  to  relate  certain  events  occurring  to  DanieP 
and  some  other  captive  Jews  in  Babylon  (illustrative  of  Hebrew 
faithfulness  under  trial,  and  God's  goodness  towards  His  loyal 
servants   (c.  i.,  iii.,  vi.)),  and  also  certain  revelations  made  to 

^  The  Daniel  who  is  the  subject  of  the  book  can  scarcely  be  identical  with 
the  Daniel  named  in  £zeL  xiv,  14,  xxviii,  3,  who,  from  the  character  of  the 
references  to  him,  must  have  lived  long  before  the  Exile. 


INTRODUCTION  25 

Daniel  individually  respecting  the  future  (c.  viii.-xii.).  There 
are,  however,  numerous  difficulties  in  the  way  of  accepting  the 
book  as  the  work  of  a  prophet  of  the  Exile.  The  narrative 
section  contains  so  many  inaccuracies  and  improbabilities  that 
a  long  period  must  have  separated  the  writer  from  the  time  which 
he  describes.  Moreover,  the  predictions  which  occupy  the 
second  half  of  the  book  differ  in  two  respects  from  those  of 
other  prophets,  since,  on  the  one  hand,  they  have  little  relation 
to  the  circumstances  of  the  writer's  assumed  age,  and  on  the 
other  hand,  they  are  very  precise  and  circumstantial  in  regard 
to  what  is  represented  as  a  distant  future.  It  has  therefore  come 
to  be  very  generally  held  that  the  book  is  of  much  later  origin 
than  the  Exile,  and  really  dates  from  the  second  century  B.C., 
being  contemporaneous  with  the  outrages  upon  the  Jewish 
nation  and  religion  perpetrated  by  Antiochus  Epiphanes  (175- 
163  B.C.).  If  this  view  is  correct,  it  will  be  clear  that  (i)  the 
narrative  part  cannot  command  implicit  confidence ;  (2)  the  bulk 
of  the  prophecies  were  written  after  the  events  predicted  had 
taken  place.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  the  incidents  and  pre- 
dictions are  alike  pure  inventions  :  the  writer,  for  his  account  of 
both,  may  have  had  materials  to  work  upon,  though,  if  so,  it  is 
probable  that  he  has  handled  them  with  freedom.  Nor  even  if 
all  the  prophecies,  except  that  of  the  destruction  of  Anliochus 
in  viii.  25  and  xi.  45,  and  the  establishment  of  the  Divine 
kingdom  in  ii.  44,  vii.  14,  27,  are  actually  vaticinia  post  eventus^ 
is  the  writer  necessarily  guilty  of  intentional  deceit.  The  pre- 
dictive form  into  which  he  has  cast  what  is  ex  hypothesi  an 
account  of  the  past  may  be  only  his  method  of  expressing  and 
making  intelligible  the  truth  that  everything  that  had  previously 
happened  had  taken  place  in  accordance  with  the  foreknowledge 
and  purpose  of  God,  and  was  preliminary  to  a  glorious  future 
which  he  beUeved  and  affirmed  to  be  in  store  for  his  suffering 
countrymen. 

Among  the  certain  or  probable  errors  which  have  been  observed  in  the 
book  may  be  mentioned  : — 

1.  The  forms  Nebuchadnezzar  iox  Nebuchadrezzar'^  and  (probably)  Abednego 
for  Abednebo. 

2.  The  statement  that  Nebuchadrezzar  besieged  Jerusalem  in  Jehoiakim's 

*  This  mistake  is  also  made  i^-  '  A^.  xxiv.  lo,  2  Ch.  xxxvi.  6,  and  E%.  i.  7, 


26  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

third  year  (i.  l)  and  carried  away  the  king  and  much  treasure  ;^  whereas  the 
predictions  \njer.  xxv.  9  (delivered  in  Jehoiakim's  fourth  year,  ver.  i)  and 
xxxvi.  29  (delivered  in  his  fifth  year,  ver.  9)  imply  that  the  Babylonian  attack 
at  those  dates  was  still  in  the  future,  and  Jehoiakim  actually  reigned  eleven 
years  (according  to  2  Kg.  xxiii.  36).  It  may  be  added  that  if  Daniel  was 
a  youth  of  (say)  12  at  the  time  at  which  he  is  represented  as  taken  to 
Babylon  (viz.  Jehoiakim's  third  year,  B.C.  604)  he  would  have  been  eighty 
at  the  fall  of  Babylon  in  536. 

3.  The  appUcation  of  the  name  Chaldeans  to  describe  professional  sooth- 
sayers and  wise  men  (ii.  2) — a  use  of  the  national  appellation  which  is  quite 
late,  Herodotus  being  the  first  to  employ  the  term  in  a  limited  sense  to  denote 
the  priests  of  Bel  (i.  181).' 

4.  The  statement  (v.  2,  18)  that  Belshazzar  was  son  of  Nebuchadrezzar 
and  king  of  Babylon  ;3  whereas,  on  the  evidence  of  inscriptions  found  at 
Mugheir  (Ur),'*  he  was  the  son  of  Nabunahid  the  last  king  of  Babylon,  and 
did  not  himself  come  to  the  throne.  If  the  statement  in  Daniel  is  to  be 
reconciled  even  approximately  with  history,  the  description  of  Nebuchad- 
rezzar zs,  father  of  Belshazzar  must  be  taken  to  mean  one  of  \i\%  predecessors^ 
and  it  has  to  be  assumed  that  Belshazzar  was  joint-ruler  with  his  real  father 
Nabunahid. 

5.  The  statement  that  the  conqueror  of  Babylon  was  Darius  the  Mede* 
(v.  31),  instead  of  Cyrus  the  Persian,  who  is  represented  as  one  of  his 
successors  (vi.  28).  In  ix.  i  Darius  is  called  the  son  of  Ahasuerus,  and  if  this 
name  stands  for  Xerxes  (cf.  Esth.  i.  i),  there  is  another  error,  for  Xerxes  was 
not  the  father,  but  the  son,  of  Darius  Hystaspis." 

The  language  of  the  book  is  partly  Hebrew  and  partly  Aramaic  ;^  and  the 
latter  is  said  to  be  of  the  Western  (Palestinian)  and  not  the  Eastern  dialect. 
The  Hebrew  is  regarded  by  scholars  as  similar  to  that  of  the  Chronicler,  and 
it  contains  certain  words  of  Persian,  and  others  of  Greek,  origin^  which  are 
not  likely  to  have  been  known  to  a  Hebrew  writer  in  the  time  of  the  Exile. 

^  The  capture  of  Jehoiakim  and  his  deportation  to  Babylon  is  also  afiirmed 
in  2  Ch.  xxxvi.  6-7  but  not  in  Kings.  -  See  Driver,  Daniel^  p.  12. 

'  The  successors  of  Nebuchadrezzar  were  really  as  follows :  Evil-Mcro- 
dach  (561),  Nergal  Sharezer  (559),  Labashi-Merodach  (556),  Nabunahid 
(554).  The  last  was  a  usurper,  and  was  overthrown  by  Cyrus,  his  capital 
(Babylon)  opening  its  gates  to  the  conqueror. 

*  Quoted  by  Driver  in  Authority  and  Archaology,  p.  123. 

•  "Darius  the  Mede"  has  by  some  authorities  been  identified  with 
Gobryas  the  general  of  Cyrus,  by  whom  (it  is  assumed)  he  was  made 
governor  of  Babylon.  But  the  name  of  Darius  has  perhaps  been  associated 
with  the  capture  of  the  city  in  consequence  of  the  later  assault  upon  it  in  520 
by  Darius  the  son  of  Hystaspes  ;  though  the  writer  of  Daniel  certainly  seems 
to  have  thought  that  a  Median  empire  succeeded  the  Babylonian  and  preceded 
the  Persian:  see  c.  vii.  and  Driver's  note,  pp.  99,  100.  That  the  Medes  would 
be  the  destroyers  of  Babylon  had  been  asserted  in  "A."  xiii.  17,  "yifr." 
li.  II.  ^  Seep.  472. 

'  As  there  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of  the  contents  to  explain  why  Hebrew 
should  be  used  in  one  part  and  Aramaic  in  another,  the  fact  has  been 
accounted  for  by  the  supposition  that  a  portion  of  the  Hebrew  original  had 
been  lost  or  destroyed,  and  that  the  gap  was  filled  by  a  section  taken  from  an 
Aramaic  version  of  the  book,  see  Bevan,  Daniel^  p.  27. 

8  Such  as  satrap  (iii.  2,  3,  vi.  I,  2),  psalty^,  harp  (Gk.  KLdapis)^  dukinur 
^Gk.  avfKpuyia)  (iii.  5,  15).  | 


INTRODUCTION  27 

The  deliverance  of  Hananiah  and  his  companions  from  the  fire  and  of 
Daniel  from  the  lions  is  quoted  in  /  Mac.  ii.  59,  60,  so  that  the  book  must 
have  been  written  very  shortly  after  the  persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes. 
According  to  Josephus  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  existed  in  the  time  of 
Alexander,  and  were  shown  to  him  at  Jerusalem ;  but  the  story  is  generally 
discredited  (cf.  p.  487). 

Hosea.  Hosea,  who  appears  to  have  been  a  native  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom,^  prophesied  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  IL;  and 
his  activity  was  probably  prolonged  into  the  reigns  of  that  king's 
three  successors,  for  vii.  7,  v.  13  seem  to  allude  to  the  deaths 
of  Zechariah  and  Shallum  (2  Kg.  xv.  8-10,  13-15),  and  to  the 
policy  of  Menahem  {2  Kg.  xv.  19).  But  whether  he  died  before 
the  reign  of  Pekah  and  the  devastation  of  Gilead  by  Assyria 
(vi.  8,  xii.  11),  or  lived  to  witness  the  intrigues  with  Egypt 
pursued  by  Hoshea  (vii.  11,  xii.  i),  who  was  the  contemporary  of 
Hezekiah  (i.  i),  is  uncertain.^ 

Joel.  The  date  oi  Joel  is  much  disputed,  as  many  of  the 
allusions  are  consistent  with  more  than  one  period.  The 
omission  of  all  mention  of  Assyria  and  Babylon  points  to  its 
having  been  produced  either  {a)  before  the  rise  of  the  former 
{i.e.  early  in  the  8th  century),  or  {b)  after  the  downfall  of  the 
latter  {i.e.  in  the  5th  century) ;  and  each  of  these  alternatives  will 
account  for  certain  features  in  the  book.  The  denunciation  of 
Tyre,  PhiHstia,  and  Edom  (iii.  4,  19)  can  be  paralleled  both 
from  Am.  i.  6-12  in  the  earlier  period  and  from  Jer.  xlvii.  4, 
"/f."  xxxiv.  5  foil.,  and  Ixiii.  1-6  later;  the  reference  to  the 
priests  (i.  9,  ii.  17),  (to  the  exclusion  of  the  king)  and  the 
absence  of  any  allusion  to  idolatry  are  reconcilable  with  its  origin 
either  in  the  early  years  of  the  rule  of  Joash  of  Judah,  over  whom 
Jehoiada  acted  as  guardian  {2  Kg.  xii.  i,  2),  or  after  the  Exile, 
under  the  Persian  domination;  the  daily  meal  offering  (i.  9,  13) 
and  the  practice  of  fasting  were  not  distinctive  of  any  age; 
whilst  in  regard  to  the  resemblance  between  Jo.   iii.   i6  and 

*  This  is  indicated  by  his  familiarity  with  various  localities  in  N.  Israel ; 
e.g.  Mizpah,  Tabor  (v.  i),  Gibeah,  Ramah,  Beth-aven  (  =  Bethel)  (v.  8), 
Shechem  (vi.  9),  Gilgal  (ix.   15). 

'  Certain  portions  of  Hosea  are  considered  by  a  few  critics  to  be  later  inter- 
polations ;  but  the  abruptness  and  obscurity  of  the  book  make  proof  of  such 
mterpolations  difficult.  The  short  section  i.  lo-ii.  I  is  probably  misplaced ; 
its  contents  connect  it  with  ii.  23. 


28  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Am.  i.  2,  and  between  y<?.  iii.  i8  and  Afn.  ix.  13,  there  is  nothing 
to  determine  which  prophet  borrowed  from  the  other.  But 
whilst  the  omission  amongst  Judah's  enemies  of  the  Ammonites 
(who  were  especially  troublesome  in  the  5th  century,  see  Neh. 
iv.  7)  is  in  favour  of  the  earlier  date  (though  Amos  in  the  8th 
century  denounced  them,  i.  13-14),  yet  the  absence  of  any 
mention  of  Syria,  the  allusions  to  Egypt  and  Greece  (iii.  19,  6), 
and,  finally,  the  description  of  Israel  as  scattered  among  the 
nations  (iii.  2),  give  a  preponderant  probability  to  the  post-exilic 
date.  The  description  of  the  overthrow  of  the  nations  (iii. 
9  foil.)  and  of  the  fountain  issuing  forth  from  the  house  of 
Jehovah  (iii.  18)  finds  a  parallel  in  Ezek.  xxxviii.-xxxix.  and 
xlvii.  I. 

Amos.  Amos,  who  was  a  native  of  Tekoa,  a  place  some 
twelve  miles  south  of  Jerusalem,  visited  the  Northern  Kingdom 
in  the  course  of  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  He  was  probably 
slightly  earlier  in  date  than  Hosea.^ 

Obadiah.  The  date  of  Obadiah  can  only  be  doubtfully 
inferred  from  the  contents  of  the  prophecy,  which  is  directed 
against  Edom  for  rejoicing  over  the  calamities  of  Judah  and 
cutting  off  her  fugitives  (ver.  14).  The  most  probable  occasion 
of  their  acting  thus  is  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  in  586  (see 
Ezek.  XXV.  12-14,  XXXV.,  Jer.  xHx.  7-22,  "/f."  xxxiv.  5,  Ixiii.  i 
foil.,  Ps.  cxxxvii.  7).  It  is  in  accordance  with  this  date  that 
the  prophet,  in  foretelling  the  eventual  restoration  of  his 
countrymen  (though  mentioning  the  house  of  Joseph,  ver.  18), 
has  in  mind  only  Judah  and  Benjamin  (ver.  19).  Obad.  1-5 
recurs  substantially  m /er.  xlix.  14-16,  9;  and  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  the  two  writers  were  nearly  contemporaneous,  it  seems 
probable  that  both  have  borrowed  from  an  earlier  prophet  who 
vrote  perhaps  in  the  time  of  Jehoram  or  Ahaz,  kings  of  Judah 
(2  Kg.  viii.  20,  xvi.  6  marg.).^  Another  view  makes  Obadiah 
pre-exilic  and  the  original  source  of  the  passage  common  to  it 
znd  Jeremiah,  The  occasion  of  Edom's  mahcious  delight  is  then 
supposed  to  be  the  attack  on  Jerusalem  made  by  the  Philistines 

^  The  authenticity  of  a  few  passages  in  Amos  is  disputed,  see  pp.  425,  428. 
2  The   quotation   from   the  earlier   writer   is  variously  understood  to  be 
verses  1-7  or  1-9. 


INTRODUCTION  29 

and  Arabians  in  the  reign  of  Jehoram  {2  Ch.  xxi.  16-17).  Edom 
had  revolted  from  Jehoram  {2  Ch,  xxi.  8-10),  and  may  have 
taken  part  in  the  assault  upon  the  capital,  though  the  historian 
does  not  mention  the  fact. 

Jonah.  The  title  of  Jonah^  like  that  of  Daniel,  appears 
to  indicate  the  subject  and  not  the  author  of  the  book.  The 
prophet  Jonah  lived  in  the  reign  of  the  Israelite  king  Jero- 
boam II.  (2  Kg.  xiv.  25) :  but  the  book  that  bears  his  name 
was  probably  written  at  a  time  when  Nineveh  was  no  longer 
in  existence,  and  when  the  Hebrew  language  was  losing  its 
early  purity.  It  is  generally  assigned  to  the  post-exilic  period, 
but  its  precise  date  is  uncertain.  It  is  a  narrative,  not  a 
prophecy ;  but  though  in  form  a  history,  is  doubtless  in  the 
main,  if  not  entirely,  a  work  of  the  imagination,  its  purpose 
being  not  to  record  facts  but,  as  in  the  case  of  a  parable,  to 
convey  a  moral  truth. 

Micah.  Micah,  a  native  of  Moresheth  Gath,  a  town  on  the 
Judaean  borders  of  Philistia,  prophesied  in  the  reigns  of  Jotham, 
Ahaz  and  Hezekiah,  ^  and  was  thus  a  contemporary  of  Isaiah. 

Nahum.  The  book  of  Nahum  is  exclusively  occupied  with 
the  approaching  doom  of  Nineveh.  Nineveh  fell  in  607 ;  and 
as  Nahum  alludes  in  iii.  8  to  the  destruction  of  No-Amon 
(Thebes)  by  Nineveh  in  665,  his  date  must  lie  between  these  two 
years.  A  more  precise  determination  of  it  does  not  seem  to  be 
possible. 

Habakkuk.  Habakkuk  probably  prophesied  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoiakim  when  the  Babylonians,  after  the  defeat  of  the 
Egyptians  at  Carchemish  (p.  383)  became  the  threatening  power 
(i.  6,  cf.  2  Kg.  xxiv.  i).  His  book  closes  with  a  psalm  (c.  iii.) 
which,  if  his,  has  been  adapted  to  liturgical  use,  having  attached 
to  it  musical  directions  (ver.  i,  3,  13,  19).^ 

^  The  prediction  contained  in  iii.  12  is  definitely  attributed  to  the  reign  of 
Hezekiah  in  Jer.  xxvi.  17-19. 

'  Doubt  has  been  thrown  upon  various  portions  of  Habakkuk,  and  more 
especially  upon  the  authorship  of  the  psalm  in  c.  iii.,  which  (i)  seems 
to  have  chiefly  in  view  calamities  brought  about  by  natural  agencies  (pestilence 
and  tempest  (ver.  5,  cf.  ver.  8)),  rather  than  devastation  wrought  by  human 
foes  (as  might  be  expected  from  c.  i.,  ii.);  (2)  appears  to  identify  yir^iwa^'j 
anointed  (ver.  13)  not  with  the  king,  but  with  the  collective  nation  (cf.  Ps. 
cv.  15),  a  mode  of  speech  more  natural  after,  than  before,  the  Captivity. 


30  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Zephaniah.  Zephaniah,  from  his  acquaintance  with  the 
various  parts  of  Jerusalem,  was  presumably  an  inhabitant  of  that 
capital.  His  prophecy  is  assigned  in  i.  i  to  the  time  of  Josiah, 
in  whose  reign  it  was  probably  delivered  early  (since  it  refers 
to  the  prevalence  of  gross  idolatry,  *i.  4,  5),  and  helped  forward 
the  reformation  afterwards  initiated.^ 

HaggaL  Haggai  prophesied  in  the  second  year  of  Darius 
Hystaspis,  B.C.  520,  his  recorded  utterances  being  all  comprised 
within  a  space  of  four  months  (L  i,  il  i,  10). 

Zechariah.  The  book  of  Zechariah,  from  the  separate  head- 
ings at  the  beginning  of  c.  ix.  and  xii.,  naturally  falls  into  three 
divisions:  (i)  L-viii.,  (2)  ix.-xi.,  (3)  xii.-xiv.,  of  which  only 
the  first  can  be  assigned  with  certainty  to  the  prophet  who  gives 
his  name  to  the  whole. 

(i)  Zechariah,  to  whom  belong  c.  i.-viii.,  began,  like  Haggai, 
his  prophetic  ministry  in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  B.C.  520 
(i.  I ),  but  it  continued  much  longer,  lasting  until  the  fourth  year 
of  the  same  king,  B.C.  518  (vii.  i). 

(2)  The  second  division  ix.-xi.  (to  which  xiii.  7-9,  from 
the  similarity  of  its  subject-matter,  should  probably  be  attached) 
appears  to  be  composite  and  to  consist  of  sections  derived  from 
various  dates.  No  trustworthy  conclusion  can  be  based  on  the 
mention  of  Damascus,  Tyre,  Zidon,  and  the  cities  of  Philistia 
(ix.  1-8),  for  all  or  most  of  these  were  denounced  alike  by  Amos 
(c.  i.)  in  the  eighth  century,  by  Jeremiah  (xlvii.,  xlix.)  at  the  end  of 
the  seventh  and  opening  of  the  sixth  centuries,  and  by  Ezekiel 
(xxv.,  xxvi.)  in  the  sixth  century.  But  {a)  the  Exile  seems 
implied  in  ix.  9-12  by  certain  resemblances  to  2  Is.^^  if  not 
in  X.  6,  by  the  reference  to  Judah  as  having  been  "cast  off." 
{b)  A  pre-exilic  date  is  most  appropriate  for  x.  10-12,  where 
Assyria  (not  Babylon)  is  named  as  one  of  the  lands  from  which 
captives  are  to  be  gathered,  and  where  Gilead  and  Lebanon 

^  The  final  section  of  Zeph.  (iii.  14-20),  from  its  resemblance  to 
passages  in  2  /j.,  has  been  regarded  by  some  authorities  as  exilic ;  but  see 
p.  447,  note. 

'  The  phrase  just  (literally  righteous)  and  having  salvation  (ix.  9)  re- 
sembles the  combination,  so  common  in  2  Is.,  of  righteousness  and  salvation 
(xlv.  8,  xlvi.  13,  li.  5,  6,  Ivi.  i):  whilst  I  will  render  double  unto  thM  (ver.  12) 
recalls  2  Is.  Lxi.  7. 


INTRODUCTION  31 

are  mentioned  as  the  districts  to  which  they  are  to  be  restored, 
these  being  the  regions  ravaged  by  Tiglath  Pileser  {2  Kg.  xv.  29); 
whilst  it  also  offers  the  best  explanation  of  xi.  8  and  14,  which 
may  refer  to  the  successive  murders,  within  a  brief  period,  of 
Zechariah,  Shallum  and  (perhaps)  Pekahiah,  and  to  the  war 
between  Israel  and  Judah  under  Pekah  and  Ahaz.  (c)  A  post- 
exilic  date  seems  demanded  for  ix.  13  by  its  reference  to  Greece 
as  a  world-power,  antagonistic  to  Zion.  These  features  suggest 
that  the  division,  as  it  stands,  is  post-exilic,  but  embodies  earlier 
material. 

(3)  The  third  division,  xii.-xiv.,  presents  very  few  marks  of 
time,  and  its  probable  date  can  scarcely  be  decided  apart  from 
considerations  of  its  tone  and  spirit.  Its  general  resemblance 
to  Ezek.  xxxviii.  and  xxxix.  is  in  favour  of  its  being  at  least  as  late 
as  the  Exile,  whilst  the  prominence  given  to  the  priestly  house  of 
Levi  beside  the  royal  house  of  David  (xii.  12-13)  seems  most  in 
keeping  with  a  post-exilic  origin. 

Some  hold  that  c.  ix.-xiv.  all  come  from  one  author,  writing 
in  the  third  century  B.C.,  and  that  the  names  Assyria  and  Egypt 
(x.  10)  designate  the  kingdoms  of  the  Seleucidae  and  Ptolemies. 

Malachi.  The  word  Malachi  means  "my  messenger"  (cf. 
iii.  i),  and  may  not  be  a  proper  name  at  all;  in  which  case  the 
book  is  anonymous.^  The  internal  evidence  points  to  the  writer 
having  been  contemporaneous  with  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  (458- 
433) ;  for  the  term  "  governor  "  (i.  8)  is  that  which  was  applied 
to  the  representative  of  the  Persian  kings  (see  Ez.  v.  6),  and 
some  of  the  sins  which  Malachi  lays  to  the  charge  of  the  people 
are  identical  with  those  against  which  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  pro- 
tested (cf  Mai.  ii.  II  with  Ez.  ix.  2  foil.,  Neh.  xiii.  23  foil,  and 
Mai.  iii.  8-10  with  Neh.  xiii.  10).  But  the  exact  time  of 
Malachi's  activity  is  uncertain.^ 

In  an  O.T.  history  in  which  both  the  authorship  and  the 
contents  of  the  O.T.  Scriptures  are  submitted  to  criticism,  two 
questions  arise  which  may  be  conveniently  considered  here. 

^  In  i.  I  the  LXX.  has  \r\jx\xo.  \6yov  Kvpiov  4-irl  rbv  lapaiiX  iv  x^'P^ 
a.'YvO^ov  airrov. 

"^  See  p.  472,  note. 


32  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  first  relates  to  the  discrepancy  between  certain  critical 
conclusions  and  Our  Lord's  language  regarding  the  subjects  of 
them  (see,  for  instance,  S.  Matt.  viii.  4  (referring  to  Lev.  xiv. 
2  foil.),  xii.  17,  40,  xxii.  43-44,  xxiv.  15;  cf.  also  S.  Joh.  x.  35). 
The  authority  attaching  to  Our  Lord's  Person  invests  every 
utterance  of  His,  in  the  eyes  of  Christians,  with  supreme  im- 
portance; and  His  slightest  affirmation  respecting  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures  claims  the  most  careful  consideration.  But  in  our  lack 
of  acquaintance  with  the  whole  of  the  conditions  of  the  Incarna- 
tion or  with  the  measure  of  the  self-emptying  which  He  undenvent 
therein,  it  seems  rash  to  assume  that  each  and  every  recorded  word 
of  His  must  be,  in  the  narrowest  and  most  rigid  sense,  correct, 
and  that  consequently  the  adoption  by  Him  of  any  position  which 
has  place  in  the  O.T.  puts  it  at  once  beyond  reach  of  doubt. 
It  is  at  any  rate  known  that  on  some  occasions  He  ap- 
peared to  exhibit  ignorance,  and  sought  information  {S.  Matt. 
XV.  34,  5.  Mk,  ix.  21,  S.  Lu.  ii.  46,  S.  Joh.  xi.  34);  that  on  other 
occasions  He  did  not  avoid  such  a  departure  from  simplicity 
of  speech  as  is  involved  in  the  use  of  irony  {S.  Mk.  vii.  9); 
and  that  He  could  employ  a  popular  term  of  contempt  where 
He  Himself  meant  to  convey  none  {S.  Matt.  xv.  26).  It  is 
therefore  conceivable  that  in  countenancing  the  O.T.  presenta- 
tion of  facts  (which  was  at  that  time  generally  unquestioned) 
He  was  only  accommodating  Himself  to  His  audience,  in  order 
to  become  intelligible  to  it,  and  that  His  acquiescence  in  such  a 
presentation  is  not  to  be  held,  in  all  cases,  decisive  of  its  accu- 
racy. It  does  not  appear  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  fullest 
acknowledgment  of  Our  Lord's  Divine  claims  to  believe  that  this 
accommodation  in  part,  at  least,  arose  from  a  real  restriction  of 
knowledge  to  which,  in  becoming  Incarnate,  He  had  conde- 
scended. It  is,  at  all  events,  exceedingly  difficult  to  draw  a  hard 
and  fast  line  between  the  various  hmitations  of  that  human 
nature  which  the  Son  of  God,  for  humanity's  sake,  deigned  to 
take  upon  Him,  or  to  assume  that  He  submitted  to  physical,  but 
not  to  intellectual,  disabilities. 

The  second  question  concerns  the  credibility  of  the  miraculous 
element  in  the  O.T.  narratives  which  will  form  the  subject  of 
the  following  pages.     The  Hebrew  writers  approached  the  annals 


INTRODUCTION  33 

of  their  nation  with  a  profound  conviction  that  its  destinies  were 
providentially  directed ;  and  that  a  Personal  God  (Whom  in  the 
course  of  time  they  came  to  recognise  as  supreme  over  the 
Universe)  was  the  active  source  of  all  that  took  place  in 
the  material  world.  They  certainly  could  not  have  been  ignorant 
of  the  means  by  which  many  of  the  events  they  witnessed  were 
brought  about.  Experience  would  necessarily  familiarise  them 
with  the  proximate  causes  by  which  birth  and  death,  plenty  and 
scarcity,  and  the  like,  were  produced,  and  with  the  constant 
recurrence  of  numerous  natural  phenomena.  Nevertheless,  ac- 
quaintance with  the  regularity  of  nature  did  not  lessen  their 
belief  in  the  free  agency  of  God  in  all  that  concerned  them; 
and  their  knowledge  of  secondary  causes,  such  as  it  was,  did 
not  impair  their  assurance  of  an  ever-present  Spiritual  Power 
ordering  and  controlling  physical  forces  at  His  sovereign 
pleasure.  This  faith  that  everything  that  happens  is  due, 
mediately  or  immediately,  to  Divine  volition,  and  is  directed 
towards  the  accomplishment  of  some  Divine  purpose,  is  one 
to  which  no  Theistic  theory  of  the  universe  can  take  exception* 
And  the  insistence  of  the  Biblical  writers  upon  the  activity  of 
the  Personal  Author  of  nature  is  a  valuable  corrective  of  a  too 
exclusive  attention  to  nature's  processes,  which  tends  to  ignore 
the  spiritual  character  of  their  Source.  But  the  Hebrew  habit 
of  mind,  whilst  sound  religiously,  was  defective  scientifically. 
The  Hebrew  writers  had  an  inadequate  acquaintance  with  the 
Divine  methods  of  which  the  laws  of  nature  are  the  expression ; 
and  the  fact  that  they  were  accustomed  to  trace  a  providential 
design  in  many  occurrences  of  which  they  knew  the  efficient 
causes  made  them  the  more  content  to  refer  simply  to  the  direct 
operation  of  God  everything  of  which,  from  their  limited  ex- 
perience, they  could  give  no  physical  explanation.  They  were 
therefore  not  likely  to  distinguish  sharply  between  the  natural 
and  the  supernatural  3  and  were  generally  inclined  to  see  God's 
greatness  evidenced  most  manifestly  in  what  was  exceptional  and 
abnormal.  They  thus  inevitably  assumed  an  uncritical  attitude 
towards  reports  of  the  marvellous ;  and  instances  are  not  lacking 
of  their  putting  a  literal  construction  even  upon  the  figurative 
and  metaphorical   language  of  poetry  (see  £x.  xiv.   29  beside 


34  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

XV.  8,  2in6.  Josh.  x.  13  b  beside  12-13  a).  The  maintenance  of 
such  an  attitude  is  impossible  now,  and  it  has  come  to  be  difficult 
to  accept  a  number  of  O.T.  stories  of  wonder  as  accurate  state- 
ments of  fact.  This  is  due  not  to  an  a  priori  conviction  of  the 
incredibility  of  the  miraculous  in  general,  but  to  the  kind  of 
evidence  forthcoming  in  favour  of  certain  particular  miracles. 
In  the  abstract,  there  is  nothing  incredible  in  the  belief  that  the 
Divine  will  can  act  as  freely  in  the  course  of  the  world's  history 
as  it  did  at  its  beginning.  To  understand  how  it  can  enter  into 
the  existing  system  of  physical  causation  and  modify  it  is  a 
difficulty  as  great  as,  but  not  greater  than,  to  understand  how 
it  first  produced  it.  Nor,  in  spite  of  the  knowledge  acquired 
of  the  Divine  method  of  working  by  law,  is  there  anything 
inconsistent  with  the  wisdom  and  prescience  of  the  Almighty  in 
the  supposition  that  He  has  departed,  on  occasion,  from  His 
general  scheme  of  action  in  order  to  cope  with  new  conditions 
resulting  from  the  liberty  delegated  to  man,  and  in  order  to 
impress  and  influence  free  human  minds.  The  bestowal  of 
freedom  upon  mankind  inevitably  introduced  into  the  universe 
an  element  of  contingency  beyond  the  compass  of  a  determinate 
order  of  things  to  deal  with,  and  requiring  to  be  met  by  new 
calls  upon  the  resources  of  the  Divine  infinitude.  Nor  again 
can  it  be  denied  that  in  the  history  of  Israel,  if  anywhere,  in- 
stances of  such  Divine  intervention  as  is  implied  in  miracles  find 
a  fitting  place.  Israel  was  an  exceptional  channel  of  God's 
revelation  of  Himself  to  the  world ;  and  its  history  stands  in 
close  relation  to  the  history  of  Our  Lord,  in  which  it  may  reason- 
ably be  thought  to  have  had  both  its  climax  and  its  interpre- 
tation. In  principle,  a  rigid  line  cannot  be  drawn  between  the 
miracles  of  the  O.T.  and  those  of  the  N.T. ;  and  the  view  taken 
of  part  or  all  of  the  latter  series  must  contribute  to  the  pre- 
possessions with  which  we  approach  the  former  series.  But  in 
the  concrete,  the  reality  of  many  of  the  O.T.  miracles  is  open 
to  question,  partly  because  the  evidence  for  some  comes  from 
relatively  late  sources,  and  partly  because  the  earliest  accounts 
(so  far  as  can  be  ascertained  or  inferred)  are  popular  and  un- 
precise  in  character,  and  express  religious  feeling  rather  than 
exact  knowledge.     It  may  be  remarked  that  the   bulk  of  the 


INTRODUCTION  35 

O.T.  miracles  occur  in  two  groups,  clustering  round  Moses,  and 
the  prophets  Elijah  and  Elisha.  No  doubt  these,  if  any,  were 
just  such  men  as  we  might  expect  to  be  endued  by  God  with 
exceptional  powers  for  special  purposes ;  and  the  fact  that  extra- 
ordinary powers  were  really  claimed  by  certain  of  the  prophets 
appears  from  the  well-authenticated  narrative  of  Isaiah  and 
Ahaz  {Is.  vii.  11).  But  it  must  likewise  be  recognised  that 
there  was  a  tendency  in  the  Hebrew  writers  to  magnify  the 
great  events  and  personages  of  the  past ;  and,  as  has  been  seen, 
it  is  possible  to  trace  the  way  in  which  some  of  the  tales  of 
marvel  respecting  certain  of  them  actually  originated.  Conse- 
quently, though  with  regard  to  the  residue  of  the  O.T.  stories  of 
the  miraculous  we  may  be  unable  plausibly  to  explain  how  they 
came  to  arise  out  of  descriptions  of  more  normal  (if  providential) 
experiences,  or  to  deny  the  possibiUty  that  everything  happened 
just  as  related,  there  is  a  considerable  presumption  that  poetic 
fancy  has  been  at  work  in  them,  and  perhaps  in  particular  cases 
altogether  created  them. 

The  question  of  prophecy  will  be  considered  elsewhere.  The 
subjects  of  miracle  and  prophecy  are  closely  akin  to  one 
another ;  and  our  attitude  towards  the  latter  as  well  as  the  former 
will  necessarily  vary  with  the  belief  entertained  respecting  the 
character  of  the  Power  that  is  behind  both  human  faculties  and 
physical  nature.  But,  as  has  been  already  implied,  a  belief  in 
the  possibility  of  a  certain  class  of  phenomena  does  not  involve 
a  belief  in  all  the  alleged  examples  of  it.  The  acceptance  or 
rejection  of  the  several  instances  must  depend  upon  the  quality 
of  the  testimony  which  can  be  produced  for  each.  The  O.T. 
narratives  of  the  supernatural,  therefore,  cannot  be  received  or 
dismissed  en  bloc:  they  require  to  be  sifted,  and  their  credibility 
estimated  in  detail 


OLD    TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

CHAPTER  I 
THE  PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD 

Sources — Gen.  i.-ix. 

THE  Old  Testament  begins  with  an  account  of  the  creation 
of  the  world  and  of  the  history  of  its  first  inhabitants. 
The  opening  chapters  of  Genesis  describe  the  process  by  which 
the  earth  assumed  its  present  form,  the  entrance  upon  it  of  the 
earliest  human  beings,  the  situation  of  their  original  dwelling- 
place,  the  introduction  among  them  of  sin  and  sorrow,  the 
names  of  their  immediate  descendants,  the  invention  by  these 
of  various  arts,  the  observance  among  them  of  religious  rites,  the 
increasing  prevalence  of  wickedness,  and  the  eventual  destruction 
of  the  whole  human  race  by  a  great  catastrophe,  a  single  family 
alone  being  preserved,  from  which  the  earth  was  again  re-peopled. 
Such  a  recital,  going  back  to  the  origin  of  the  universe  and  man- 
kind, is  obviously  not  an  historical  record  of  actual  events,  but 
a  series  of  inferences  relating  to  times  which  are  pre-historic.  It 
represents  the  explanations,  arrived  at  in  ways  that  it  is  now  im- 
possible to  trace,  which  reflection  furnished  of  the  many  questions 
spontaneously  occurring  to  a  primitive  race  respecting  themselves 
and  their  surroundings.  Similar  narratives  are  found  in  the  early 
literature  of  most  peoples,  notably  those  of  Greece,  India,  and 
Babylonia.  The  nearest  parallels  to  the  Biblical  records  are 
afforded  by  Babylonia,  the  country  from  which,  as  will  appear, 
the  Hebrew  people  emigrated;  and  comparison  shows  that 
certain  common  beliefs  concerning  the  beginnings  of  the  earth 

37 

2'?2862 


38  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  of  man  must  have  prevailed  in  the  circle  of  nations  to  which 
both  Babylonians  and  Hebrews  belonged.  These  beliefs,  as  was 
not  unnatural  in  an  age  when  the  products  of  the  imagination 
were  distinguished  even  more  imperfectly  than  is  the  case  now 
from  the  conclusions  of  the  reason,  were  expressed  in  the  form 
of  positive  assertions,  conjectures  assuming  the  guise  of  facts. 

The  value  of  the  early  chapters  of  Genesis  as  an  account 
of  real  incidents  in  the  history  of  the  world  and  of  the  human 
race  appears  in  the  light  of  modern  inquiry  to  be  no  greater  than, 
from  the  origin  and  character  of  the  record,  it  might  be  expected 
to  be.  The  Biblical  narratives,  on  the  whole,  are  distinguished 
by  a  reasonableness  and  a  dignity  which  offer  a  striking  contrast 
to  the  ridiculous,  and  sometimes  offensive,  elements  that  are 
manifest  in  many  parallel  representations.  In  some  parts  (more 
particularly  in  the  description  of  the  several  stages  of  the 
Creation)  a  remarkable,  though  superficial,  agreement  with  the 
conclusions  of  modem  research  may  be  detected.  But  in  the 
fields  alike  of  human  history  and  physical  science,  the  Biblical 
writers  had  not  adequate  materials  for  satisfactorily  ascertaining 
the  truth.  Records  preserving  the  one,  and  instruments  for 
prosecuting  the  other,  were  equally  wanting ;  and  consequently 
the  Bible  statements,  where  they  come  into  competition  with 
those  of  modem  investigators,  are  obviously  of  inferior  authority. 
It  is,  however,  important  to  discriminate  between  the  scientific 
aspect  of  the  narratives  in  Genesis  and  the  philosophical  and 
theological  ideas  which  pervade  them.  The  account  of  the 
process  by  which  the  world  came  into  existence,  representing, 
as  it  does,  the  science  of  the  age  that  produced  it,  has  become 
obsolete  with  the  progress  of  discovery;  but  the  truth  of  the 
assertion  that  the  universe  was  the  creation  of  a  Personal  God  is 
not  equally  out  of  date.  The  conceptions  entertained  of  the 
nature  of  sin,  of  the  consequences  it  entails,  and  of  the  trans- 
mission of  them  to  future  generations  are  not  necessarily  in- 
validated by  the  impossibility  of  accepting  the  history  in  which 
they  are  embodied  as  a  record  of  real  occurrences.  At  the  same 
time,  it  would  be  to  mistake  the  object  of  the  Biblical  writers 
to  regard  it  as  being  primarily  the  exposition  of  either  theological 
or  scientific  truths.     Nothing,  foi  instance,  is  urged  in  support  of 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC  WORLD  39 

a  belief  in  God,  or  of  a  belief  in  one  God  rather  than  in  many 
gods.  The  existence  of  God  is  assumed,  and  His  creative  power 
is  represented  as  active  "  in  the  beginning  "  :  but  the  view  taken 
of  the  origin  of  the  chaos  upon  which  the  Divine  activity  was 
exerted  is  obscure,  and  the  language  used  might  almost  be 
reconciled  with  a  belief  in  its  being  coseval  with  the  Deity 
Himself.  Again,  that  the  account  of  the  early  history  of 
mankind,  as  it  stands,  is  not  intended  to  be  a  complete  one, 
or  to  satisfy  mere  curiosity,  is  suggested  by  the  gaps  which  it 
contains.  It  seems  probable  that  out  of  a  mass  of  floating 
legends  concerning  the  earth  and  mankind  current  in  the  countries 
from  which  the  Hebrews  derived  their  origin,  only  those  were 
preserved  which  could  contribute  to  a  particular  purpose.  This 
was  the  history  of  the  people  of  Israel,  their  fortunes  and  their 
hopes;  and  it  was  in  order  to  connect  it  with  the  history  of 
the  world  in  general  that  the  early  narratives  of  Genesis  were  col- 
lected and  arranged.  They  form  an  introduction  to  the  records 
that  follow,  and  ostensibly  enable  the  destiny  of  the  Israelite 
race  to  be  traced  from  the  time  of  the  Creation  onward.  As 
will  be  seen,  the  range  of  peoples  and  races  with  which  the  book 
of  Genesis  is  concerned  grows  successively  narrower.  In  the 
opening  chapters,  the  origin  and  ancestry  of  all  mankind  is 
passed  under  review ;  but  by  degrees,  notice  is  confined  to  one 
line  of  descent,  to  the  neglect  of  the  others,  until  ultimately 
it  is  to  a  single  family  and  its  posterity  that  attention  is  ex- 
clusively devoted.  The  people  whose  fortunes  are  related  in 
the  Old  Testament  was,  in  the  view  of  those  who  compiled  it, 
a  Chosen  People;  and  in  the  plan  and  course  of  the  narrative  the 
process  of  its  election  is  reflected. 


THE  CREATION 
Of  the  work  of  Creation  and  the  history  of  the  earliest 
generations  of  mankind  two  accounts  (as  has  been  already 
indicated  in  the  Introduction^)  are  combined.  Of  these  two 
accounts,  the  first  (contained  in  Gen.  i.  i-ii.  4a,  from  the  source 
symbolised  by  P)  begins  by  describing  the  world  as  a  waste  of 

^  See  pp.  3-4. 


40  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

waters,  enveloped  in  darkness,  upon  which  the  spirit^  of  God 
brooded.  The  work  of  creating  order  out  of  chaos  was  accom- 
plished in  six  days,  God  bringing  into  existence. 

On  the  First  day,^  Light,  and  the  distinction  of   Day  and 
Night. 
„        Second  „     the  Firmament^  (called  Heaven)  dividing 

the  upper  from  the  lower  waters. 
„         Third    „      the   separation   of  the   dry  land   (called 
Earth)  from  the   lower  waters  (called 
Seas),  and  the  production  by  the  earth 
of  vegetation. 
„        Fourth  „      the  luminaries  (the  sun  and  moon)  and 

the  stars. 
„         Fifth     „      marine  animals  and  birds. 
„         Sixth     „      terrestrial  animals  and  man   (both   male 
and  female),  to  whom  herbs  and  fruits 
were  assigned  as  food. 
On  the  Seventh  day  God  rested  from  His  work,  and,  in  conse- 
quence, blessed  the  day  and  sanctified  it. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  most  prominent  features  of  the 
universe  and  the  chief  occupants  of  the  globe  are  divided  into 
groups,  and  their  creation  is  represented  as  taking  place  on 
successive  days.  The  production  of  both  animal  Hfe  and 
vegetation  is  ascribed  to  the  earth  and  waters  in  virtue  of  the 
command  of  God  (i.  ii,  20,  24).  At  the  end  of  the  series  of 
creative  acts,  as  the  climax  to  which  the  process  of  the  world's 
making  leads,  man  is  introduced,  created  "  in  the  image  of  God." 
It  is  mainly  in  its  bearing  upon  the  needs  and  duties  of  man 
that  the  rest  of  nature  is  regarded.  The  sun  and  moon,  besides 
giving  light,  are  intended  to  mark  the  seasons,  under  which 
religious  festivals  are  probably  included  (i.  14,  15);  the  earth 
and  its  creatures  are  made  subordinate  to,  and  placed  under, 

1  Cf.  Ps.  xxxiii.  6  (Heb.). 

'  In  the  description  of  the  several  days,  evening  and  morning  are  named  in 
the  order  of  their  succession  after  the  creation  of  light. 

*  The  firmament  (LXX.  orep^w/ia)  was  conceived  to  be  a  soUd  expanse 
{ci.Job  xxxvii.  18,  Prov.  viii.  28)  supporting  the  upper  waters  [Ps.  cxlviii.  4) 
from  which  the  rain  descended,  and  dividing  them  from  the  seas :  cf.  aidTjpeos 
oupavbSy  X'^^i^^o^  ovpauds  (Horn.  Od.  xv.  329,  //.  xvii.  425). 


THE  PRE-HISTORIC  WORLD  41 

man's  control  (i.  28) ;  and  the  vegetable  kingdom  is  assigned  to 
him,  together  with  the  lower  animals,  for  meat  (i.  29,  30). 

The  order  in  which  the  various  kinds  of  animals  are  described  as  having 
been  created  corresponds  roughly  to  that  in  which,  by  the  evidence  of 
geology,  they  actually  appeared  on  the  earth ;  and  consequently  efforts  have 
been  made  to  prove  that  the  correspondence  is  exact,  the  term  day  being 
taken  to  mean  a  considerable  period  of  time  answering  to  a  geological  epoch. 
But  that  the  word  was  intended  by  the  writer  of  Genesis  i.  in  the  ordinary 
sense  is  clear  from  the  expression  "it  was  evening  and  it  was  morning  (one) 
day " ;  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  in  Ex.  xx.  1 1  the  restriction  of  human 
labour  to  six  days  of  the  week  is  actually  based  on  the  precedent  set  by  the 
Deity  in  the  work  of  creation.  And  in  general  the  natural  sense  of  the 
language  of  Gen.  i.  is  opposed  to  the  meaning  which  it  has  been  attempted 
to  extract  from  it ;  whilst,  apart  from  the  inherent  improbability  of  an 
ancient  writing  anticipating  accurately  the  conclusions  of  modern  science,  it 
may  be  shown  that  there  exist  discrepancies  in  detail : — 

(i)  In  Genesis y  though  light  is  created  on  the ^rsi  day,  the  sun  is  created 
on  the  fourth ;  whereas  the  earth  is  separated  from  the  seas  and  produces 
vegetation  on  the  third.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  earth  and  the  sun  form 
part  of  one  system,  the  planets,  of  which  the  earth  is  one,  having  been 
detached  from  a  mass  of  originally  gaseous  matter  of  which  the  sun  constituted 
the  centre,  so  that  their  existence  as  separate  bodies  must  have  been  con- 
temporaneous. 

(2)  In  Genesis^  aquatic  animals  and  birds  are  represented  as  created  on 
the  same  day  (i.  20) ;  whereas,  according  to  the  record  of  the  rocks,  fishes, 
small  reptiles,  insects,  and  marsupial  animals  all  appeared  before  birds. 

(3)  According  to  6'<?«(?m  vegetation  (as  has  been  said)  was  created  on  the 
third  day  (i.  11,  12),  preceding  by  two  days  the  appearance  of  animals  on  the 
earth,  whilst  the  evidence  of  geology,  so  far  as  it  is  complete,  shows  that 
throughout  they  existed  together. 

(4)  The  view  that  all  animals  were  at  first  vegetarian  feeders  is  not  borne 
out  by  facts,  and  is  manifestly  due  to  the  idealisation  of  the  earth's  youth  as  a 
Golden  Age.  * 

The  second  account  of  the  Creation  (ii.  4b-25,  from  JE)  is 
a  partial  one.  As  comprised  in  Genesis^  it  pre-supposes  the 
formation  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  and  describes  the  further 
activity  of  the  Creator  (here  called  Jehovah  God^)  in  the  newly- 
created  but  vacant  world.  The  Divine  operations  are  not  divided 
into  days,  and  the  order  observed  is  seemingly,  though  not 
perhaps  certainly,  different.  No  plant  or  herb  (it  is  related) 
had  yet  grown,  for  there  was  no  rain,  and  no  man  to  till  the 
ground ;  but  there  used  to  go  up  a  mist  to  water  the  earth.  And 
Jehovah  formed  man  of  the  dust,  and  placed  him  in  a  garden 
which  He  planted  eastward  in  Eden,  and  which  was  watered  by 

^  Cf.  Ov.  Met.  i.  104,  Contentique  cibiSy  nullo  cogente^  creatiSy  Arbuteoi 
fatus  montanaqtu  fraga  legebant. 

*  For  the  significance  of  the  naxsxt  Jehovah  see  p.  104. 


\ 


42  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

a  river  that,  on  leaving  the  garden,  parted  and  became  four  heads, 
the  Pishon,  the  Gihon,  the  Hiddekel,  and  the  Euphrates.  Of 
all  the  trees  of  the  garden  the  man  was  permitted  to  eat,  with  the 
exception  of  one,  called  the  tree  of  the  knowledge  of  good  and 
evil,  from  which  he  was  directed  to  abstain  on  pain  of  death. 
Animals  and  birds  were  then*  formed,  and  brought  to  the  man 
to  be  named ;  and  finally  from  the  man,  whilst  asleep,  Jehovah 
took  a  rib  and  made  a  woman,  whom  He  brought  to  the  man 
to  be  his  help-meet.  And  the  two  were  naked  and  not  ashamed. 
This  version  is  distinguished  from  the  previous  alike  by  the 
lowly  origin  assigned  to  man  (who,  instead  of  being  described 
as  made  in  the  Divine  likeness,  is  regarded  as  formed  from  the 
dust,  and  as  afterwards  bringing  evil  upon  himself  by  striving 
to  become  as  God  (iii.  5) ),  and  by  the  exceptionally  anthropo- 
morphic conception  of  the  Deity.  God,  who  here  receives  the 
proper  n2ime  Jehovah,  is  depicted  as  breathing  into  man's  nostrils 
the  breath  of  life,  as  planting  a  garden,  as  bringing  the  animals 
to  the  man  to  name,  as  taking  one  of  the  man's  ribs,  closing 
up  the  flesh,  and  building  (ii.  2,  marg.)  of  the  rib  a  woman.  The 
garden  in  which  the  man  and  his  wife  are  placed  is  localised  in 
a  position  which  the  description  of  the  four  streams,  into  which 
the  river  watering  the  garden  parts,  is  clearly  intended  to  identify. 
As  two  of  the  rivers  are  the  Euphrates  and  the  Hiddekel,  or 
Tigris,^  the  region  within  which  Eden  is  regarded  as  situated 
is  evidently  Babylonia,  lying  eastward  of  Palestine;  but  the 
uncertainty  attaching  to  the  other  two  names — the  Pishon  and 
Gihon— now  makes  a  more  precise  identification  mere  guess- 
work. 

In  historic  times  there  was  an  Eden  (the  bit  Adini  of  the  inscriptions)  on 
the  Upper  Euphrates,  conquered  by  Assyrian  kings  {2  Kg.  xix.  12= Is. 
xxxvii.  12) ;  but  by  the  writer  of  Genesis  the  name  was  probably  associated 
with  a  word  signifying  "delight"  (cf.  the  LXX.  of  iii.  23,  6  irapddeia-os  riji 
Tpvipijs).  In  the  Babylonian  inscriptions  there  occurs  a  word,  seemingly 
identical  with  it,  meaning  "field"  or  "plain,"  which  might  describe  the 
level  ground  between  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates.  With  regard  to  the  two 
unknown  rivers,  the  most  probable  view  seems  to  be  that  the  Pishon  is 
intended  to  denote  one  of  the  channels  into  which  the  Euphrates  divides 
in  its  course  through  Babylonia,  since  the  land  of  Havilah,  which  it  is  said 
to  encompass,  was  probably  the  country  bordering  the  W.  coast  of  the 
Persian  Gulf  (see  p.  66).     The  land  of  Cush,  which  the  Gihon  encompassed, 

^  Cf.  Ban.  X.  4. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  43 

is  probably  the  district  of  the  Cassi,  a  tribe  dwelling  east  of  the  Tigris ;  and 
the  river  meant  will  presumably  be  one  of  the  eastern  affluents  of  the  Tigris, 
perhaps  the  Kerkhah. ' 

As  has  been  already  stated,  parallels  to  several  parts  of  these 
Creation  narratives  are  found  among  various  nations.  In  Classical 
mythology,  for  instance,  Prometheus  is  related  to  have  made  men 
out  of  earth  mixed  with  water  (Ov.  Met.  i.  80-83).  But  the 
closest  parallel  is  afforded  by  the  Babylonian  inscriptions,  which 
have  been  deciphered  from  a  number  of  clay  tablets  found  on 
the  site  of  the  ancient  Nineveh.  According  to  the  fragmentary 
story  contained  in  these  inscriptions,^  the  heaven  and  earth 
were  produced  by  chaos,  personified  as  two  powers,  Apsu 
and  Tidmat,  From  these  the  first  generation  of  gods  came 
forth,  (Lakhmu  and  Lakhamu,  Anshar,  and  Kishar) ;  and  these 
were  followed  by  a  second  (Anu,  Ea,  Bel,  and  others).  Even- 
tually between  the  gods  and  Tidmat^  who  is  represented  as 
a  monstrous  dragon,^  a  quarrel  arose,  in  the  course  of  which  the 
dragon  was  slain  by  one  of  the  gods  (Merodach) ;  and  her  body 
divided  into  two  parts,  one  of  which  was  made  a  covering  for 
the  sky,  to  prevent  (Uke  the  Biblical  "firmament")  the  upper 
waters  from  issuing  forth  from  their  place.  Then  Merodach  made 
the  stars,  ordained  the  years  and  months,  over  which  he  set 
certain  stars  to  rule,  and  appointed  the  moon  to  preside  over 
the  night,  and  the  sun  in  like  connection  with  the  day.  A 
succeeding  tablet  probably  related  the  origin  of  vegetation, 
animals,  and  man,  but  it  has  unfortunately  been  lost,  though 
another,  in  a  different  series,  makes  mention  of  the  creation 
of  living  creatures,  cattle,  wild  beasts,  and  creeping  things. 
Enough,  however,  has  been  preserved  to  show  that  the  resem- 
blances to  the  Bible  narrative  extend  even  to  details;  and  it 
may  be  added  that  a  term  answering  to  the  Hebrew  "  Sabbath  " 

^  The  name  Cush  was  also  applied  to  Ethiopia  (see  x.  6,  Is.  xviii.  i);  and 
Josephus  {Ant.  i.  i)  identifies  the  Gihon  with  the  Nile  (of.  LXX.  of /<rr.  ii.  i8). 
The  same  writer  also  describes  the  Pishon  as  flowing  through  India,  and 
identifies  it  with  the  Ganges. 

^  See  Sayce,  The  Higher  Criticism  and  the  Monuments,  p.  63,  Boscawen, 
The  Bible  and  the  Monuments,  p.  42,  Driver  in  Authority  and  Archceology, 
p.  10  foil.,  L.  W.  ICing,  Babylonian  Religion,  p.  6i  foil. 

'  The  same  conception  of  the  Deep  as  a  dragon  or  serpent  perhaps  survives 
in  Am.  ix.  l.  Job  xxvi.  12,  Fs.  Ixxxix.  9,  lO,  3  Is.  li.  9-10. 


44  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

is  also  found  in  the  Babylonian  sacred  calendars,  the  performance 
of  certain  acts  being  forbidden  every  seventh  day,  in  order  that 
on  it  the  gods  might  rest  from  their  anger  and  be  pacified.^ 

Yet  in  spite  of  the  features  which  the  Hebrew  narratives  of 
the  origin  of  the  world  share  in  common  with  those  of  other 
races,  the  contrasts  between  them  are  no  less  significant.  In 
particular,  the  many  similarities  between  the  account  in  Genesis 
and  that  discovered  on  the  site  of  Nineveh  only  throw  into  relief 
the  superiority  of  the  former.  Whilst  the  Biblical  record  is  very 
much  on  a  level  with  the  other  in  the  region  of  speculative 
thought,  it  is  far  otherwise  in  the  field  of  religious  truth. 

It  has  been  stated  to  be  probable  that  the  history  of  Creation, 
as  given  in  Genesis^  has  been  transmitted  from  times  when 
Hebrews  and  Babylonians  were  in  close  contact  with  one  another, 
the  main  outlines  being  preserved  unaltered,  whilst  the  theological 
conceptions  have  been  silently  changed.  Consequently  the  his- 
tory throws  only  a  side-light  upon  the  religious  ideas  involved, 
instead  of  explaining  them  directly.  But  notwithstanding  the 
incidental  manner  in  which  the  beliefs  animating  the  narratives 
are  conveyed,  and  the  somewhat  crude  form  in  which  (in  Gen.  ii.) 
they  are  expressed,  there  are  implied,  throughout  the  recital,  the 
truths  of  the  Divine  Personality,  the  Divine  Unity,  and  the 
Divine  Goodness. 

I.  All  belief  in  Creation  involves  a  beUef  in  God's  Personality. 
The  elements  into  which  Personality,  so  far  as  it  is  capable  of 
analysis,  can  be  resolved  are  Thought,  Will,  and  Feeling;  and 
both  of  the  Biblical  narratives  explicitly  describe  the  Deity  as 
thinking,  determining,  and  approving.  In  depicting  the  universe 
as  the  work  of  a  personal  Creator  the  Hebrew  history  does  not 
stand  alone ;  but  it  asserts  the  fact  in  a  much  less  ambiguous 
form  than  does,  for  instance,  the  Babylonian.  In  the  latter, 
though  one  of  the  gods  is  represented  as  creating  the  planets 
and  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth,  yet  the  gods  themselves  emerge 
from  the  primaeval  chaos.  On  the  other  hand,  from  the  begin- 
ning of  Genesis  onwards  the  pre-existence  of  God  is  assumed; 
and  though  it  is  true  that  no  explanation  is  given  of  how  chaos 

^  Thus  amongst  the  Babylonians  the  Sabbath  was  not  regarded  as  a  day 
of  rest  for  man,  but  of  placability  on  the  part  of  the  deities. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  45 

came  into  being, ^  yet  it  is  throughout  regarded  as  wholly  inert  and 
passive,  possessed  of  none  of  the  spontaneous  powers  of  genera- 
tion attributed  to  it  in  the  Babylonian  inscriptions.  The  belief 
in  a  Personal  Creator  is  opposed  not  less  to  a  materialistic 
explanation  of  the  universe — which  regards  it  as  the  ultimate 
result  of  an  original  aggregate  of  matter,  brought  about  auto- 
matically in  accordance  with  mechanical,  chemical,  and  other 
laws — than  it  is  to  a  pantheism  which  views  the  world  as  the 
external  manifestation  of  an  indwelling  Spirit,  who,  outside  the 
limits  of  nature,  has  no  existence,  and  whose  only  personality 
is  that  of  the  collective  human  race.  If  God  is  a  Person,  then, 
however  immanent  and  active  He  may  be  in  nature,  both 
physical  and  human,  He  cannot  be  identified  with  nature;  and 
in  Genesis  the  distinction  is  asserted  by  the  constant  repeti- 
tion of  the  Divine  y^^/  before  each  stage  of  the  creative  process.  ^ 
The  immanence  of  God  in  nature  is,  indeed,  recognised  after 
a  simple  fashion  when,  in  consequence  of  the  utterance  of  the 
Divine  will,  the  earth  is  said  to  have  put  forth  grass,  herb,  and 
fruit  tree,  and  the  waters  to  have  brought  forth  the  moving 
creature  that  has  life  (Gen.  i.  11,  20).  But  though  the  Spirit 
of  God  is  represented  as  operating  through  the  universe,  it  is 
nowhere  confused  with  the  natural  agents  which  subserve  His 
purposes.  Nor  is  the  relation  thus  regarded  as  subsisting  be- 
tween God  and  the  universe  materially  altered  by  later  and  more 
scientific  views  respecting  the  process  by  which  the  world  has 
been  produced.  The  theory  of  evolution,  for  instance,  only 
indicates  a  possible  method  by  which  it  reached  its  present 
condition;  the  belief  that  ascribes  its  origin  to  the  will  of  a 
Creator  is  equally  true,  whether  it  has  been  gradually  developed 
from  certain  primordial  elements,  in  which  the  capacity  for  such 
development  was  latent,  or  whether  its  various  departments  and 
provinces  came  into  existence  in  disconnected  succession,  as 
depicted  in  Genesis.  It  is  from  an  Agent  possessed  of  powers 
of  initiation  analogous  to  our  own  that  the  Universe,  in  the  last 
resort,  must  have  come,  whether  His  acts  of  volition  have  been 
one  or  many,  continuous  or  occasional. 

In  the  assertion,  then,  in  Gen.  i.,  of  God's  personality,  and  the 
1  Cf.  Wisd.  xi.  17.  »  See  Gen.  i.  3,  6,  9,  11,  etc. 


46  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

description  of  His  activity  in  terms  borrowed  from  human 
actions,  there  is  nothing  which  is  anthropomorphic  in  a  gross  and 
unreal  sense.  In  Gen.  ii.  the  representation  is  of  a  ruder 
character;  but  the  fact  that  the  Hebrews,  after  passing  through 
a  simple  and  elementary  stage  of  religious  ideas,  could  outgrow 
it  without  at  the  same  time  parting  with  the  vital  truth  therein 
embodied  is,  in  itself,  an  indication  of  the  exceptional  hold 
which  they  had  upon  a  Theistic  faith.  With  the  Greeks,  on  the 
contrary,  it  was  otherwise.  Dissatisfaction  with  the  human-like 
delineations  of  the  gods  found  in  the  poems  of  Homer  (which 
might  almost  be  described  as  the  Greek  Bible)  led  philosophers 
like  Xenophanes  to  purify  the  idea  of  God  by  practically  empty- 
ing it  of  personaUty.  The  early  Greeks  had  imagined  the  gods 
to  be  like  men,  and  bad  men  at  that  ;i  and  when  it  became  im- 
possible to  retain  such  a  belief,  the  element  of  truth  in  it,  which 
is  the  pre-supposition  of  all  real  communion  (as  contrasted 
with  confusion)  between  God  and  man,  tended  to  disappear. 
Amongst  the  Hebrews,  primitive  ideas  of  the  Divine  nature  were 
enlarged  and  purified  without  either  human  worship  or  human 
responsibility  suffering.  The  decline  in  the  anthropomorphic 
conception  of  God  was  compensated  by  what  has  been  termed 
a  theomorphic  conception  of  man.  Man  was  believed  to  have 
been  created  in  the  image,  and  after  the  Hkeness,  of  God  {Gen. 
i.  26,  27);  and  as  such,  to  have  possessed  originally  so  much 
in  common  with  his  Maker  as  enabled  him  to  hold  converse  with 
Him,  and  even  (as  the  subsequent  story  of  Enoch  suggests) 
to  share  the  Divine  life.  That  the  actual  condition  of  mankind 
corresponded  but  ill  with  so  exalted  a  view  was  obvious ;  but  this 
was  explained  by  the  history  of  the  Fall. 

2.  A  belief  in  the  Unity  of  God  was  not  attained  by  the 
Hebrews  until  comparatively  late  in  their  history;  and  their 
progress  towards  it  will  from  time  to  time  call  for  notice.  The 
plural  form  of  the  commonest  Hebrew  word  for  God  {Elohim) 
may  even  be  a  survival  of  a  polytheistic  stage  of  thought. 2  But 
by  the  period  when  the  Creation  narrative  in  Gen.  i.  arrived  at 

*  See  p.  48,  note. 

'  Another  explanation  of  the  plural  is  that  it  is  intensive  in  character, 
indicating  the  greatness  of  godhead.  A  similar  use  of  the  plural  occurs  in 
connection  with  a  title  like  Adonim  "lord,"  which  may  be  used  of  an  in- 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  47 

its  present  shape,  the  idea  of  the  Unity  of  God  had  been  firmly 
grasped.  The  existence,  indeed,  of  other  celestial  beings  is 
indicated  in  Gen.  i.  26  (cf.  iii.  22,  xi.  7,  xviii.  2  foil.,  i  Kgs. 
xxii.  19-22,  Is.  vi.  8);  but  they  are  manifestly  quite  sub- 
ordinate, attendants  upon  the  Divine  majesty,  and  interested  in 
His  work.  On  the  other  hand,  most  early  religions  were  ex- 
plicitly and  avowedly  polytheistic.  The  chief  gods  stood  in 
various  relations  to  one  another,  after  the  analogy  of  human 
kindred;  and  were  believed  to  be  moved  by  the  same  loves 
and  hatreds,  partialities  and  jealousies  which  prevailed  amongst 
mankind.  At  later  periods,  reflection  sought  to  replace  the 
conception  of  a  number  of  conflicting  and  antagonistic  powers, 
controlling  the  world,  by  the  idea  of  a  single  governing  principle. 
But  among  the  Semitic  races  generally  the  most  that  was  attained 
was  the  exclusive  worship  of  a  particular  god  rather  than  a 
belief  in  the  sole  existence  of  one  God — monolatry  rather  than 
monotheism.  Each  nation  had  a  deity  to  which  it  rendered 
reverence  and  service  without  denying  the  reality  of  the  deities 
adored  by  its  neighbours.^  Of  the  Aryan  peoples  the  Persians, 
who  recognised  a  single  principle  of  Good,  set  over  against  it 
an  equally  potent  principle  of  Evil,  and  thus  acquiesced  in 
a  system  of  Dualism.  In  Greece  the  effort  after  Unity  at  first 
sought  satisfaction  in  the  subordination  to  Zeus  of  the  rest  of 
the  gods  (as  described  in  Homer),  but  afterwards  took  a  philo- 
sophic, rather  than  a  religious,  direction.  With  some  other 
nations  the  revolt  against  polytheism  assumed  the  form  of 
pantheism.  Among  the  Hebrews  alone  of  the  leading  peoples 
of  antiquity  a  monotheistic  religion  seems  to  have  been  de- 
veloped; they  only  appear  to  have  attained  to  a  real  faith  in 
a  single  supreme  God. 

3.  In  the  story  of  Creation  there  is  less  scope  for  a  disclosure 
of  the  Divine  Goodness  than  of  some  other  attributes ;  for  God's 
beneficence  is  most  clearly  evinced  in  connection  with  human 
fortunes,  and  the  tale  of  these  has,  as  yet,  scarcely  begun.  But 
the  reiteration,  after  each  step  of  His  creative  activity,  of  the 

dividual  man,  and  have  attributes  attached  to  it  in  the  singular,  see  Is.  xix.  4 
(Heb.).     Cf.  Prov.  ix.  10. 
1  See  pp.  84-6. 


48  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

phrase  "God  saw  that  it  was  good,"  directs  attention  to  the 
perfection  of  His  work  and,  by  implication,  to  the  perfection 
of  the  Creator.  The  Divine  goodness,  as  displayed  alike  in  the 
physical  universe  (c.  i.)  and  in  the  care  shown  for  man's  comfort 
(c.  ii.),  forms  the  background  against  which  the  disobedience  of 
the  first  man  and  woman  (as  narrated  in  c.  iii.),  and  the  murder 
committed  by  their  offspring  (as  recorded  in  c.  iv.)  stand  out  the 
more  luridly.  Beyond  this,  the  chapters  under  review  do  not  go. 
The  ethical  conception  of  God  underwent  a  process  of  growth 
and  advance  in  the  course  of  Hebrew  history;  and  the  ideas 
eventually  formed  of  the  Divine  character  were,  in  many  respects, 
unlike  those  which  prevailed  at  an  early  age.  But  among  the 
Hebrews  the  notion  entertained  of  Divine  morality  never  fell 
below  the  contemporary  standards  of  human  morality,  as  was  the 
case  amongst  some  other  ancient  peoples.^  Hence  with  them 
religion  and  morality  never  became  divorced,  as  happened  else- 
where; and  their  religious  beliefs  alone  have  been  found  pure 
enough  and  elevated  enough  to  command  and  retain  the  rever- 
ence of  the  civilised  world. 

THE   FALL 

The  narrative  of  the  Fall  is  a  sequel  to  the  second  of  the  two 
accounts  of  the  Creation,  and  relates  the  disobedience  shown  by 
the  man  and  his  wife  to  the  command  of  Jehovah,  and  their 
consequent  expulsion  from  the  garden.  The  serpent,  which  was 
more  subtle  than  any  other,  beast  of  the  field,  tempted  the  woman 
to  eat  of  the  forbidden  tree  by  representing  that  by  tasting  its 
fruit  she  and  the  man  would  become  as  God,  knowing  good  and 
evil.  She  yielded  to  the  temptation,  partook  of  the  fruit,  and 
gave  to  her  husband :  whereupon  the  pair  realised  that  they  were 
naked,  and  made  themselves  aprons,  or  girdles,  of  fig-leaves. 
Hearing  the  sound  of  Jehovah  walking  in  the  garden,  they  hid 
themselves ;  and  the  man,  on  being  summoned  and  questioned, 
threw  the  blame  on  the  woman,  and  she,  in  turn,  on  the  serpent 

*  Xenophanes  of  Colophon,  in  particular,  complained  that 
vivTO.  dcoh  ividTjKav'O/irjpds  6'  "BaioSSs  re 
Sffcra  trap'  avOpdjiroKXiv  dveLSea  Kal  ^6705  iffrb, 
icXiTTTeip,  iioix^v€t.v  re,  Kal  dXXiJXoi/s  dTrarei/cu', 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  49 

The  latter  was  pronounced  cursed  by  Jehovah,  and  told  that 
thenceforward  it  should  go  on  its  belly,  and  its  food  should  be  dust. 
Between  it  and  the  woman  there  would  be  perpetual  enmity ;  the 
seed  of  the  latter  should  bruise  the  serpent's  head,  and  the 
serpent  should  bruise  his  heel.  To  the  woman  it  was  announced 
that  with  sorrow  she  should  bring  forth  children,  and  should 
be  subject  to  her  husband.  Finally  to  the  man  (Adam'^)  it  was 
declared  that  the  ground  was  cursed  for  his  sake,  and  that  only 
by  the  sweat  of  his  brow  should  he  obtain  his  bread  from  it,  till 
he  returned  to  the  dust  from  which  he  was  taken.  For  him  and 
his  wife  (whom  he  called  £ve^)  Jehovah  made  garments  of  skins; 
but  lest  they  should  take  of  the  tree  of  life,^  and  so  live  for  ever, 
they  were  expelled  from  the  garden  of  Eden,  before  which  there 
were  placed  the  cherubim^  and  a  flaming  sword  which  turned 
about,  to  keep  the  way  of  the  tree  of  life. 

The  situation  of  the  garden  of  Eden,  as  has  already  been 
stated,  is  placed  in  Babylonia ;  and  it  is  possible  that  the  general 
outline  of  the  story  of  the  Fall  may,  with  some  others  of  the 
narratives  of  Genesis^  go  back  to  a  time  when  the  ancestors  of 
the  Hebrews  and  Babylonians  were  in  touch  with  one  another. 
A  seal  has  even  been  found  on  which  a  scene  is  depicted 
bearing  some  resemblance  to  that  implied  in  the  Biblical 
narrative,  two  figures  (their  sex  is  uncertain)  being  represented 
as  seated  on  either  side  of  a  fruit-tree,  to  which  they  are  both 
stretching  out  their  hands,  whilst  behind  one  of  them  a  serpent 
is  coiling  upward.  In  addition,  a  mutilated  inscription  upon  one 
of  the  clay-tablets  already  referred  to,  has  been  deciphered,  in 
which  some  scholars  have  seen  an  allusion  to  the  forbidden  fruit ; 
but  according  to  others  the  connection  in  which  the  passage 
stands  and  its  actual  contents  negative  the  supposed  parallel. 
The  cherubim^  one  of  which  in  Fs.  xviii.    10  serves  as  God's 

^  Adam,  the  ordinary  Hebrew  word  for  man,  seems  to  be  used  as  a  proper 
name  first  in  Gen.  iii.  17.  Both  it  and  the  Hebrew  word  for  groutui  (see 
iii.  19)  appear  to  be  connected  with  a  root  signifying  to  be  "red"  or 
«•  ruddy." 

»  i.e.  life. 

'  The  belief  that  a  tree  could  communicate  life  to  those  who  ate  of  it  was 
akin  to  the  beUef  that  it  possessed  life — an  idea  at  the  root  of  tree-worship 
(cf.  p.  87).  The  idea  was  doubtless  suggested  by  the  phenomena  of  growth, 
sappiness,  etc. 


50  OLD   TESTAMENT  HISTORY 

chariot,^  and  is  associated  with  "  the  wings  of  the  wind  "  (and 
hence  has  been  taken  to  represent  a  storm-cloud),  fulfil  a  different 
purpose  in  Gen.  iii.  24,  where  they  act  as  sentinels ^  to  prevent 
access  to  the  tree  of  life.  In  Ezekiel  i.  10,  x.  14-15  (where,  as 
in  Ps.  xviii.,  they  are  accompanied  by  wind  and  cloud  and  fire) 
they  are  described  as  having  four  wings  and  four  faces — those  of 
a  man,  a  lion,  an  ox,  and  an  eagle,^  the  description  suggesting 
their  resemblance  to  the  colossal  figures  of  winged  lions  and 
oxen,  bearing  human  heads,  which  have  been  discovered  among 
the  ruins  of  Nineveh;  and  it  is,  no  doubt,  in  these  that  the 
cherubim  of  Gen.  iii.  24  likewise  have  their  parallel.  But  whilst 
it  may  be  assumed  that  an  element  common  both  to  Hebrews  and 
Babylonians  underlies  the  Bible  history  of  the  Fall,  there .  appear 
in  conjunction  with  it  certain  local  features  peculiar  to  the 
Hebrews  (the  fig-tree,  for  instance,  belongs  to  Palestine,  not 
Babylonia,  see  Hdt.  i.  193),  and  its  whole  inward  meaning  and 
significance  (so  far  as  can  be  judged)  has  been  altogether  trans- 
formed. 

In  its  present  connection,  the  narrative  of  the  Fall  is  apparently 
an  attempt  at  explaining  the  transition  from  the  perfection  and 
happiness  which  man  is  supposed  to  have  enjoyed  at  the  first  to 
the  very  different  conditions  which  now  prevail.  It  purports  to 
account  for  the  entrance  into  the  world  of  sin,  suffering,  and 
shortened  life.  In  carrying  out  this  purpose  it  is  less  faithful 
to  historical  than  to  moral  and  religious  truth.  The  evidence  of 
archaeology,  geology,  biology,  and  allied  sciences  points  to  the 
conclusion  that  man,  so  far  from  having  begun  his  existence  upon 
the  globe  in  the  happy  surroundings  of  an  Eden,  has  slowly 
emerged  from  a  state  of  savagery,  in  which  he  was,  externally  at 
least,  Uttle  removed  from  the  brute  creation.  His  primitive  con- 
dition was  not  one  of  harmony  and  happiness,  but  of  fierce 
conflict  against  opposing  forces.  Pain  and  death  prevailed  upon 
earth  before  man  made  his  appearance,  and  have,  it  would  seem, 
been  prime  factors  in  his  evolution.     The  narrative  is  valuable, 

^  Similarly  the  cherubim  in  Solomon's  temple  are  termed  "the  chariot"  in 
/  Ch.  xxviii.  18.     Cf.  also  Ecclus.  xlix.  8. 

2  In  Ezek.  xxviii,  14-16  (LXX.)  the  cherub  performs  a  like  duty. 

'  In  Ezek.  xli.  18-19  the  cherubim  have  two  faces,  those  of  a  man  and  a 
lion. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  51 

therefore,   not  as  a  description    of   historical   events    but   as   a 
declaration  of  certain  important  ideas. 

The  main  ideas  which  the  story  conveys  are  three:  (i)  that 
the  relations  which  God  intended  should  subsist  between  Himself 
and  man  have  been  disturbed  by  the  act  of  the  latter ;  (2)  that 
suffering  is  the  result  of  sin ;  (3)  that  a  judgment  incurred  by 
one  generation  involves  succeeding  generations  in  its  con- 
sequences. As  might  be  expected,  they  are  not  set  forth 
guardedly  and  with  such  qualifications  as  later  reflection  suggests, 
and  the  particular  way  in  which  they  are  imparted  gives  rise 
to  obvious  difficulties.  But  nevertheless  they  are,  on  the  whole, 
true  to  fact.  In  the  first  place,  it  is  assumed  that  man  (like  the 
God  in  whose  image  he  was  created)  is  a  free  agent ;  but  that 
his  Creator  has  a  claim  upon  his  obedience.  There  is  thus 
implied  the  subordination  of  man  as  a  moral  being  to  a  law 
arising  out  of  the  relative  positions  of  himself  and  the  Power 
to  whom  he  owes  his  origin.  This  required  submission  man 
withholds ;  and  at  the  promptings  of  the  tempter,  he  exercises 
his  power  of  choice  in  a  direction  contrary  to  God's  will.  His 
disobedience,  in  consequence,  involves  him  in  retribution;  and 
his  misconduct  gets  its  deserts  in  the  exchange  of  a  condition 
of  happiness  for  one  of  unhappiness.  Secondly,  by  representing 
the  ground  as  being  cursed  for  Adam's  sake,  and  the  medium 
of  his  punishment,  the  narrative  gives  symbolically  an  explana- 
tion of  the  prevalent  hardships  of  human  life,  which,  though 
not  exhaustive,  cannot  be  deemed  erroneous.  That  all  physical 
evil  is  not  directly  traceable  to  human  sin  is,  indeed,  plain 
from  the  history  of  the  earth  anterior  to  man's  existence. 
But  in  some  cases,  at  least,  a  connection  is  actually  visible 
between  the  two;  and  in  others  it  may  be  inferred,  unless  all 
belief  in  a  moral  government  of  the  world  is  abandoned. 
Finally,  the  solidarity  of  humanity,  in  consequence  of  which 
the  suffering  merited  by  the  guilty  is  entailed  in  varying  degrees 
upon  the  innocent,  is  a  fact  attested  by  all  history.  The  moral 
law  of  individual,  as  opposed  to  collective,  responsibility  (which 
in  the  Hebrew  consciousness  only  asserted  itself  gradually)^ 
co-exists  in  this  world  with  a  law  of  physical  heredity;  and 
^  See  pp.  442-4. 


52  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

their  reconciliation  has  to  be  sought  in  the  world  to  come.  On 
the  other  hand,  it  is  not  clear  that  the  narrative  of  Genesis  is 
intended  to  imply  that  a  perverted  moral  nature  was  transmitted 
by  Adam  and  Eve  to  their  offspring.  The  succeeding  generations 
are  not  represented  as  uniformly  wicked,  as  appears  from  the 
instances  of  Abel,  Enoch,  and  Noah  ;  and  in  iv.  7  (according  to 
one  rendering,  see  marg.),  Cain's  duty,  and  consequent  ability,  to 
master  his  sin  is  asserted  without  any  indication  that  his  power  of 
resistance  was  less  than  his  father's.  In  the  view  of  the  historian, 
what  Adam's  posterity  inherited  in  consequence  of  his  fall  was 
physical  discomfort  rather  than  a  corrupt  disposition. 

The  reason  why  the  serpent  appears  as  the  instigator  of  dis- 
obedience to  the  commands  of  God  is  obscure.  That  spiritual 
agencies  were  popularly  thought  by  the  Hebrews  of  even  a  late 
date  to  subsist  under  certain  animal  forms  is  clear  from  the 
prohibition,  in  Lev.  xvii.  7,  of  the  worship  of  satyrs  or  he-goats. 
The  serpent,  in  particular,  was  regarded  by  some  ancient  peoples 
as  partly  the  embodiment,  and  partly  the  symbol,  of  the  more 
subtle  and  potent  elements  in  human  nature  itself:  by  the 
Romans,  for  example,  it  was  held  to  be  both  the  emblem  of 
genius  and  the  visible  representative  of  the  spirit  of  a  deceased 
hero  (Verg.  A.  v.  95).  It  is  said  to  have  been  associated  by  the 
ancient  Persians  with  Ahriman,  the  principle  of  evil;  and  the 
early  Arabians  are  related  to  have  believed  that  evil  spirits  dwelt 
in  the  bodies  of  serpents.  It  is  noteworthy,  too,  that  a  Hebrew 
word  for  the  practice  of  divination  is  akin  to  the  usual  term  for 
serpent?-  Amongst  the  Babylonians,  the  primaeval  Deep,  in  the 
tablet  which  relates  the  war  in  which  it  engaged  against  the  gods,^ 
was  represented  as  a  Dragon ;  and  it  is  possible  that  this  is  the 
ultimate  source  from  which  the  Biblical  conception  came.  But 
if  so,  the  early  idea  has  been  greatly  modified,  with  the  result 
that  some  inconsistency  is  apparent  in  the  existing  description. 
On  the  one  hand,  the  serpent  of  Genesis  is  obviously  not  an 
original  power,  independent  of  God,  for  it  is  included  among  the 
beasts  of  the  field  which  Jehovah-God  had  made.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  is  moved  by  an  impulse  of  hostiUty  towards  the  Deity, 

*  See  Gen.  xliv.  5,  2  Kg.  xvii.  17,  Deut.  xviii.  10. 
»  See  p.  43. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  53 

and  becomes  the  prompter  of  rebellion.  For  such  a  part  the 
serpent,  of  all  members  of  the  animal  kingdom,  by  its  insidious 
habits,  and  the  antipathy  which  it  generally  inspires,  was  most 
adapted ;  and  its  exceptional  method  of  locomotion  readily  lends 
itself  to  the  explanation  that  it  was  the  effect  of  a  curse.  The 
language  used  to  describe  the  enmity  which  it  was  declared 
should  exist  between  it  and  the  seed  of  the  woman — "  he  shall 
bruise  thy  head  and  thou  shalt  bruise  his  heel" — is  manifestly 
in  the  first  place  expressive  of  the  methods  of  attack  pursued 
towards  each  other  by  mankind  and  the  serpentine  race.  But 
since  the  serpent  is  not  a  mere  serpent,  but  the  subtle  suggester 
of  disobedience,!  the  words  just  quoted  are  doubtless  likewise 
intended  to  depict  the  moral  and  spiritual  conflict  of  which  the 
human  soul  is  the  theatre,  and  perhaps  even  to  express  a  belief 
in  the  eventual  triumph  of  man  over  his  enemy.  But  any  con- 
scious reference  to  a  personal  Messiah,  such  as  the  Hebrews  subse- 
quently came  to  look  for,  seems  altogether  improbable.  Belief  in 
the  Fall  produced  Httle  influence  on  Jewish  thought,  as  enshrined 
in  the  Old  Testament,  and  direct  allusions  to  it  are  hardly  to 
be  found  (unless  Prov.  iii.  18,  xi.  30,  2  Is.  xliii.  27,  Hos.  vi.  7, 
Job  xxxi.  33  be  such).^  At  the  date  when  the  story  of  it  took 
its  present  shape,  it  is  scarcely  likely  that  the  Messianic  hope  had 
gone  beyond  the  anticipation  of  a  renewal  of  national  glory 
under  a  king,  or  kings,  of  Davidic  descent — the  stage  it  reached 
in  the  tenth  and  ninth  centuries  b.c.^ 

^  The  first  express  identification  of  the  Serpent  with  the  Spirit  of  Evil 
seems  to  occur  in  Wisd.  ii.  24,  whence  it  is  adopted  into  the  N.T.  (Rev. 
xii.  9,  XX.  2).  Generally  in  the  O.T.  God  is  represented  as  the  direct  source 
of  all  that  happens  to  man,  evil  included  :  see  2  Is.  xlv.  7,  Lam.  iii.  38, 
Is.  xxix.  10,  2  Is.  Ixiii.  17,  and  cf.  Ex.  iv.  21,  Jud.  ix.  23,  i  Sam.  ii.  25, 
xvi.  14,  2  Sam.  xxiv.  i,  /  Kg.  xii.  15.  But  in  i  Kg.  xxii.  21  the  enticement 
of  Ahab  is  the  work  of  a  subordinate  spirit,  and  in  i  Ch.  xxi.  i  (in  contrast 
to  2  Sam.  xxiv.  i)  the  agent  who  moves  David  to  number  Israel  is  Satan.  It 
is  'the  Satan'  also  who,  in  the  court  of  heaven,  casts  doubt  on  Job's  sincerity, 
and  afterwards  is  the  author  of  his  trials  {Job  i.  6,  ii.  i  foil. ),  and  who  appears 
as  the  adversary  of  the  High  Priest  Joshua  in  Zech.  iii.  i. 

'  In  the  Apocrypha  references  to  the  Fall  are  more  numerous,  see  Ecdus. 
xxv.  24,  2  Esd.  iii.  21,  iv.  30,  vii.  48  (118).  An  allusion  to  the  Garden  of 
Eden  seems  to  occur  in  the  difficult  passage  Ezek.  xxviii.   11-19. 

*  See  pp.  292-3. 


54  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

THE   FIRST   MURDER 

Adam  and  Eve,  after  their  expulsion  from  Eden,  had  two 
sons,  the  first  called  Cain  and  the  second  Abel.  The  former 
of  these  was  a  tiller  of  the  ground,  the  latter  a  keeper  of  sheep. 
Each  brought  to  Jehovah  an  offering  of  what  he  possessed ;  but 
whereas  to  the  offering  of  Abel  Jehovah  had  respect,  to  the 
offering  of  Cain  He  had  not  respect.  Cain,  in  consequence, 
became  angry  and  his  countenance  fell;  but  Jehovah,  re- 
monstrating, declared  that  if  he  did  well,  it  should  be  lifted 
up  (see  iv.  7  marg.),  but  if  he  did  not  well,  sin  couched  at  the 
door.^  Then  Cain  took  his  brother  out  into  the  field^  and  slew 
him;  and  when  Jehovah  made  inquiry  about  him,  denied  that 
he  knew  where  he  was.  I'hereupon  he  was  told  that  his 
brother's  blood  cried  for  vengeance,  and  he  was  pronounced 
cursed ;  the  ground  was  not  to  yield  to  him  its  strength ;  and 
he  was  to  be  a  fugitive  and  a  wanderer.  But  to  prevent  anyone 
from  slaying  him,  it  was  declared  that  a  sevenfold  vengeance 
should  be  exacted  from  his  slayer;  and  a  sign  was  appointed 
for  him  (the  nature  of  which  is  not  stated)  that  he  might  be 
recognised.  Cain  then  departed  into  the  land  of  Nod,^  east 
of  Eden,  where  he  built  a  city  and  called  it  after  a  son  that 
was  born  to  him,  Enoch>  Of  his  subsequent  descendants,  one, 
Lamech,  took  two  wives,  named  Adah  and  Zillah.  Adah  bore 
Jabal  and  Jubal,  of  whom  the  first  was  the  father  {i.e.  the 
instructor)  of  such  as  dwelt  in  tents  and  had  cattle;  whilst 
the  second  was  the  father  of  those  who  handled  the  harp  and 
pipe.     Zillah's  children  were  Tubal-cain,  the  father  of  all  smiths 

1  So  the  Hebrew.  But  the  LXX.,  pointing  differently,  renders  ojJ/c  iav  opdCis 
xpoaev^KTjS,  opOus  8^  /ir]  SiA-js,  iifj-dpres,  i]<jvxa.(^ov,  which  implies  that  the 
reason  why  Cain's  ofifering  was  not  accepted  was  some  error  in  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  made.  Possibly  the  narrative  is  meant  to  elevate  animal  above 
vegetable  sacrifices ;  but  cf.  Hed.  xi.  4. 

'  This  is  expressed  in  the  LXX.,  which  reads  in  ver.  8,  Kal  elire  KdiV  vpds 
'A^cX  rbv  d5e\<pbv  airroO,  AuXdufiey  els  rb  irebioy,  whilst  in  the  Hebrew  there 
are  indications  of  a  lacuna. 

'  Literally  Lattd  of  Wandering,  with  an  allusion  to  ver.  12,  14.  It  has 
been  taken  to  describe  the  mountainous  region  E.  of  the  Tigris,  inhabited  by 
wild  and  restless  tribes. 

*  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  2)  represents  Adam  and  Eve  as  having  daughters  born 
to  them,  as  well  as  sons,  and  presumably  supposes  that  Cain  married  one  of 
his  sisters. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD 


55 


and  workers  in  metal,  and  a  daughter  Naamah.     The  possession 

of  weapons  wrought  by  Tubal-cain  enabled  Lamech  to  retaliate 

upon  one  who  had  wounded  him,  and  to  boast  that  if  Cain  should 

be  avenged  sevenfold,  he  himself  would  be  avenged  seventy  and 

sevenfold.     After  the  death  of  Abel  a  third  son  was  born  to 

Adam,  named  Seth;    and  Seth  had   a  son   named  Enosh,   in 

whose  time  the  worship  of  Jehovah  is  said  to  have  begun  to 

prevail.     Of  the  further  descendants  of   Seth  little  is  related, 

except  the  age  at  which  each  begat   his  eldest  son,   and   the 

age  at  which  he  died.     The  figures  in  all  cases  are  exceptionally 

high,  and  are  given   differently  in  the   ordinary  Hebrew   text, 

the  Samaritan  text,  and  the  LXX.  version.     But  of  one  of  Seth's 

stock,   Enoch,  it  is  recorded   that   he  walked  with  God;   and 

instead  of  his  death  being  described  in  the  usual  terms,  it  is  said 

that  "  he  was  not,  for  God  took  him."    The  last  name  in  the  list 

is  that  of  Noah,  who  is  the  principal  character  in  the  succeeding 

narrative  of  the  Flood. 

The  accounts  of  the  posterity  of  Seth  and  of  Cain  come  respectively  from 
the  two  sources  from  which  the  duplicate  narratives  of  the  Creation  have 
been  derived  ;  and  the  correspondence  observable  between  them  suggests  that 
the  two  lists  of  names  are  variant  versions  of  a  common  tradition.  The 
source  denoted  by  the  letters  JE  mentions  Seth  and  his  son  Enosh,  as  well  as 
Cain. 

P  JE 

Seth 


Enosh 

I 
Kenan 

I 
Mehalalel 

Jared 

Enoch 


Methuselah 
Lamech 


Noah 


Cain  (Kain) 


Enoch 

Irad 

I 
Methujael 

I 
Methushael 

I 
Lamech 

I 
i \ 1 

Jabal      Jubal      Tubal -cam 


56  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  first  part  of  c.  iv.,  though  relating  the  history  of  the  children  of  the 
first-created  of  mankind,  yet  strangely  pre-supposes  the  existence  of  a  popu- 
lation elsewhere,  from  which  Cain  obtained  his  wife  and  the  inhabitants 
of  his  city  (ver.  17),  and  amongst  which  he  feared  to  find  an  avenger  of  blood. 
No  Ught  is  thrown  upon  these  diflSculties  by  any  parallel  in  the  Babylonian 
inscriptions. 

The  main  purpose  of  the  story  of  Cain  and  Abel  is  manifestly 
to  describe  the  increasing  deterioration  of  mankind  after  the 
Fall  Disobedience  to  the  command  of  God  in  the  first  genera- 
tion is  followed  by  fratricide  in  the  second;  and  subsequently 
bloodshed  becomes  a  matter  for  boasting  (iv.  23).  In  the  history 
of  human  wickedness,  the  Divine  righteousness  finds  further 
illustration,  God  appearing  as  the  vindicator  of  outraged  justice. 
But  another,  though  a  subordinate,  purpose  is  the  tracing  of  the 
progress  of  civilisation.  Abel  leads  a  pastoral  life,  but  Cain 
practises  agriculture  and  builds  a  city;  whilst  his  descendants 
domesticate  the  larger  cattle,  invent  musical  instruments,  and 
devise  brazen  and  iron  implements,  including  weapons  of  war. 
It  is  possible  that  by  representing  the  development  of  the  arts 
as  the  work  of  Cain  and  his  posterity,  the  writer  displays  his 
own  partiality  for  nomadic,  as  contrasted  with  settled,  life;  or  more 
probably,  the  preference  implied  goes  back  to  the  ancient  period 
from  which  it  is  likely  that  the  material  of  this,  as  of  the  alhed 
narratives,  has  been  transmitted.  To  the  lives  of  extraordinary 
diu-ation  attributed  to  the  descendants  of  Seth  in  c.  v.  a  parallel 
is  furnished  by  Hesiod's  account  of  the  Silver  Age,  when  cKarov 
/x€V  irals  €T€a  irapa  fi-qrept  K€Bvy  'ETp€<p€T^  draXXoiV  fieya  vqTnos  (^ 
ivl  oLKw'^;  and  Josephus  (A^if.  i.  3,  9)  alludes  to  Hecataeus, 
Hellanicus,  Ephorus,  and  other  historians  as  holding  the  same 
belief.  The  removal  of  Enoch  to  the  presence  of  God  seem- 
ingly without  dying  is  also  not  unexampled  among  the  kindred 
records  of  other  nations.  Something  of  the  sort,  it  wull  be  seen, 
is  related  of  the  chief  character  in  the  Babylonian  Flood  story ; 
and  parallels,  more  or  less  relevant,  may  be  adduced  from  Greek 
legend.  ^  But  a  notable  feature  in  the  Biblical  incident  (as  con- 
trasted at  least  with  those  derived  from  Classical  sources)  is  its 
moral  colouring.  The  translation  of  Enoch  is  ascribed  to  his  godly 
life ;  it  was  because  he  walked  with  God  that  God  took  him. 

^  lies.  Works  and  Days,  129-130.  *  Cf.  Horn.  Od.  xv.  250-251. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC  WORLD  $7 

THE  FLOOD 

In  the  process  of  time,  men  began  to  multiply,  and  with  the 
increase  of  population  there  came  also  an  increase  of  wickedness, 
until  God  repented  that  He  had  made  man  upon  the  earth.  Unions 
took  place  between  the  daughters  of  men  and  the  "sons  of  God'* 
(the  latter  term  probably  denoting  divine  beings,  or  angels,  such 
as  are  implied  in  i.  26,  xi.  7  as  attending  upon  the  Deity);  and 
the  spread  of  violence  is  doubtless  regarded  as  due  to  the  more 
than  mortal  audacity  of  the  offspring  of  such  marriages.  There 
was  also  existent  then  a  race  called  Nephilim,  of  gigantic  stature 
(cf.  Num.  xiii.  33)  and  presumably  sinister  disposition.  In  con- 
sequence of  the  depravity  of  mankind,  God  finally  determined  to 
destroy  the  earth  and  everything  upon  it,  with  the  exception  of 
Noah,  who  alone  of  his  generation  was  a  righteous  man. 

The  expression  sons  of  God  is  sometimes  used  to  designate  godly  men  (see 
Ps.  Ixxiii.  15) ;  and  has  here  been  interpreted  to  denote  the  descendants  of 
Seth  (cf.  iv.  26),  the  phrase  dazighters  of  men  being  understood  to  mean  the 
daughters  of  other  men  indiscriminately  (cf.  Jer.  xxxii.  20,  Jud.  xvi.  7,  Heb. ). 
Another  view  is  that  the  first  term  indicates  the  upper  and  ruling  classes,  and 
the  second,  women  of  the  inferior  orders  (cf.  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6-7).  But  the  natural 
sense  of  the  words  sons  of  God  is  that  found  in  Job  i.  6  (cf.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  6), 
and  the  passage  is  doubtless  meant  (as  Josephus,  Ant.  i.  3.  i.  takes  it)  to 
describe  the  intermarriage  of  divine  beings  with  mortal  women  (cf.  Jude  6,  7) ; 
and  finds  familiar  parallels  in  Greek  legend.^ 

Noah,  to  save  himself  and  his  household,  was  directed  to 
build  an  ark  of  gopher-wood,^  300  cubits  long,  50  cubits 
broad,  and  30  cubits  high;  and  to  take  into  it,  together 
with  his  wife,  his  three  sons,  and  their  wives,  some  of  every 
kind  of  living  creature  (according  to  one  statement,  a  single 
pair  of  all  sorts,  according  to  another,  seven  pairs  of  clean 
and  one  pair  of  unclean  animals).  When  these  directions 
were  carried  out,  and  all  hs^  entered  the  Ark,  rain  descended 
from  heaven,  and  the  fountains  of  the  great  deep  were  broken  up, 
so  that  a  flood  of  waters  prevailed  on  the  earth,  and  the  tops  of 
the  mountains  were  covered.  The  flood  lasted  for  a  long  period 
(represented  in  one  series  of  passages  (derived  from  P)  as  a 
year  and  10  days;^  but  in  another  series  (from  JE)  as  only  61 

^  Cf.  the  stories  relating  to  Zeus  and  Europa,  Helios  and  Clymene,  etc. 
^  The  wood  meant  is  unknown  j  but  probably  some  kind  of  fir  is  intended. 
'  See  G<n.  vii.  11,  viii.  13-14. 


58  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

days^);  and  when  it  eventually  subsided,  the  Ark  rested  on  the 
mountains  of  Ararat  (Armenia).  To  find  whether  the  ground 
on  the  plain  or  in  the  valleys  was  dried,  Noah  sent  out  succes- 
sively a  raven  and  a  dove.  The  raven,  a  carrion  bird,  did  not 
come  back ;  but  the  dove  returned  twice  before  finally  departing, 
bringing  the  second  time  the  leaf  of  an  olive-tree  (which  only 
grows  in  the  valleys),  from  which  Noah  knew  that  the  waters 
were  abated.  On  leaving  the  Ark,  he  built  an  altar  to  Jehovah, 
and  offered  burnt-offerings  of  every  clean  beast  and  every  clean 
bird.  Then  Jehovah  smelled  the  sweet  savour,  and  said  in 
His  heart  that  He  would  not  again  smite  all  living,  as  He  had 
done;  and  God  blessed  Noah,  delivering  into  his  hand  every 
living  creature,  and  giving  them  to  him  for  food  equally  with  the 
herbs  that  were  originally  assigned  for  this  purpose,  the  blood 
alone  being  prohibited.  The  blood  of  man,  it  was  added,  would 
be  required  at  the  hand  of  him  who  shed  it.  Finally,  God 
established  a  covenant  with  Noah  that  He  would  not  again 
destroy  the  earth  with  a  flood ;  and  as  a  sign,  the  bow  was  set 
in  the  clouds,  that  when  He  brought  a  cloud  over  the  earth,  He 
might  remember  His  covenant. 

The  preceding  narrative  is  derived  from  both  of  the  two  Pentateuchal 
sources  JE  and  P ;  but  the  various  sections  have  been  fused  together  into  a 
tolerably  consistent  history.  The  chief  discrepancies  have  been  noticed  as 
they  have  occurred. 

Accounts  are  found  in  many  quarters  of  the  globe  which  agree 
in  representing  the  human  race  as  destroyed  by  water,  and  pro- 
pagated afresh  from  a  few  individuals  saved  from  destruction  by 
escaping  to  a  mountain  or  island  which  remained  uncovered,  or 
by  taking  refuge  in  a  •boat  or  raft.  The  story  current  in  Greece 
as  reproduced  by  Ovid  {Met.  i.  240,  cf.  Pind.  OL  ix.  65-71)  re- 
lated that  Jupiter  (Zeus)  in  conjunction  with  Neptune  (Poseidon) 
overwhelmed  the  world  with  a  flood  and  destroyed  the  inhabitants 
either  by  drowning  or  starvation.  Two  persons,  Deucalion  and 
Pyrrha,  alone  were  saved  by  ascending  Mt.  Parnassus ;  and  then, 
to  re-people  the  earth,  were  directed  to  throw  stones  behind  them, 
those  cast  by  Deucalion  becoming  men,  and  those  cast  by 
Pyrrha  becoming  women.      In  India,   Brahma  is  said  to  have 

^  See  Gen.  vii.  12,  viii.  10,  12. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC   WORLD  59 

announced  to  Manu  a  coming  flood  which  destroyed  the  earth, 
and  to  have  bidden  him  build  a  ship,  into  which  he  was  to 
betake  himself,  together  with  all  kinds  of  seeds.  Brahma,  in 
the  form  of  a  fish,  guided  the  ship ;  and  when  the  flood  abated, 
it  was  left  on  a  mountain  in  the  north.  Similar  histories  have 
been  found  in  China,  in  Africa,  and  in  Mexico  and  other  parts 
of  the  American  continent.  But  much  the  closest  parallel  to 
the  Biblical  record  has  been  deciphered  from  the  Babylonian 
inscriptions.^  This  recites  how  the  gods  Anu,  Ea,  and  others, 
at  the  instigation  of  Bel,  resolved  to  bring  about  a  flood,  their 
determination  being  communicated  by  Ea  to  one  Ut-na-pishtim 
(Shamash-pishtim  or  Tsitna-pishtim).  The  latter  was  bidden  to 
construct  a  ship  and  to  take  refuge  in  it,  with  his  family  and 
slaves.  What  was  necessary  for  subsistence  was  stored  within  it ; 
whilst  cattle  and  wild  beasts  were  likewise  gathered  into  it,  to 
preserve  the  seed  of  life.  Ut-na-pishtim  then  entered  into  it 
with  his  possessions,  closed  the  door,  and  intrusted  the  vessel 
to  the  helmsman.  The  rain  fell,  and  the  flood  rose  for  six  days 
and  nights,  until  even  the  gods  themselves  were  afraid ;  but  on 
the  seventh  day  it  subsided,  and  the  ship  rested  on  the  mountains 
of  Nizir  (probably  the  Gordyaean  range,  E.  of  the  Tigris).  After 
another  seven  days,  Ut-na-pishtim  sent  forth  in  succession  a  dove 
and  a  swallow,  which  both  returned,  and  lastly  a  raven,  which 
did  not  return.  Then  he  let  forth  the  animals  and  offered  a 
sacrifice  on  an  altar,  built  on  the  mountain,  to  which  the  gods, 
on  smeUing  the  savour,  gathered  like  flies.  Bel  wished  none  to 
come  forth  alive,  but  he  was  appeased  by  the  other  gods,  who 
urged  that  the  sinner,  and  not  the  righteous,  should  suffer  the 
penalty  of  his  sin,  and  that  man  should  be  diminished  by  wild 
beasts  or  by  famine,  and  no|  by  a  flood.  Then  Ut-na-pishtim 
was  taken  by  Bel  into  covenant,  and  he  and  his  family  were  re- 
moved to  a  distant  spot  at  the  mouth  of  the  rivers  to  dwell 
as  gods. 

The  similarity  between  the  Babylonian  and  Hebrew  accounts 

is  so  great  that  it  is  manifest  that  they  are  substantially  variant 

versions   of  an   early  story  common   to   both   peoples.      It   is 

possible  that  the  same  may  have  given  rise  to,  or  influenced,  the 

^  See  Sayce,  H.  C.  M.,  p.  107  foil.,  Boscawen,  p.  114  foil. 


6o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Greek  and  Indian  legends;  but  the  others,  no  doubt,  arose 
independently.  The  occurrence  of  a  universal  flood,  within  the 
period  in  which  man  has  lived  on  the  earth,  is  precluded  by  the 
evidence  of  geology;  and  upon  the  intrinsic  improbabilities  in- 
volved in  the  accounts  of  the  inclusion  and  maintenance,  in  the 
Ark,  of  specimens  of  every  variety  of  existing  animal  it  is  not 
necessary  to  enlarge.  The  fact  at  the  base  of  the  Hebrew  and 
Babylonian  story  may  be  an  extensive  inundation  of  the  valley 
of  the  Euphrates,  both  that  river  and  the  Tigris  frequently  over- 
flowing their  banks  in  consequence  of  the  melting  of  the  snow 
on  the  mountains  whence  they  take  their  rise,  and  so  producing 
floods,  it  is  said,  on  a  colossal  scale.  Similar  disasters  are  not 
uncommon  elsewhere,  being  occasioned  either  by  an  excessive 
rainfall,  by  the  bursting  of  a  river's  banks,  or  (in  the  case  of 
peoples  Hving  by  the  coast  or  on  an  island)  by  a  tidal  wave 
consequent  upon  an  earthquake.  In  such  catastrophes  many 
of  the  accounts  just  related,  or  alluded  to,  find  their  simplest 
explanation ;  though  some  may  be  mere  inventions  or  hypotheses 
to  account  for  the  existence  of  fossil  shells  on  hillsides  (as  is  said 
to  be  the  case  with  that  of  the  Leeward  islanders).^  In  these 
accounts  generally  there  are  many  isolated  points  of  resemblance 
to  the  Biblical  narrative,  some  of  which  may  be  due  to  coin- 
cidence, whilst  others  may  perhaps  be  suspected  of  being  intro- 
duced from  acquaintance  with  the  O.T.  story. 

The  idea  of  a  destructive  flood  being  the  divinely-sent  penalty 
for  human  sin  is  not  peculiar  to  the  Biblical  history,  but  is  shared 
by  it  with  others,  notably  the  Babylonian.  But  the  Biblical 
account  gains  greatly  by  comparison,  in  consequence  of  its  pre- 
vailing representation  of  one  God  as  the  ruler  and  judge  of  the 
world.  Among  the  many  gods  of  the  Babylonian  heaven  there 
is  room  for  divergent  desires  and  purposes;  and  in  the  record 
deciphered  from  the  inscriptions,  not  divine  justice  only,  but 
divine  vindictiveness  is  illustrated.  The  contrast  indicates  how 
greatly  the  belief  in  the  moral  government  of  the  universe  was 
promoted  by  the  conception  of  God  entertained  by  the  Biblical 
writers,  however  slowly  the  conception  in  question  may  have  been 
apprehended  by  the  popular  consciousness  of  the  Hebrew  nation. 

^  See  Hastings'  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  vol.  ii.  p.  l8. 


THE   PRE-HISTORIC  WORLD  6i 

The  narrative  of  the  Flood  introduces,  for  the  first  time,  several 
features  of  religious  belief  and  usage  which  subsequently  become 
prominent  in  Hebrew  history.  The  offering  of  sacrifice  has 
already  come  under  notice  in  connection  with  the  story  of  Cain 
and  Abel :  but  Noah  is  the  first  who  is  represented  as  building 
an  altar ;  and  his  offerings,  which  are  described  as  burnt-offerings, 
are  chosen  only  from  those  beasts  and  birds  which  are  "  clean." 
The  ideas  at  the  root  of  the  practice  of  sacrifice,  and  of  the 
distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  animals,  as  well  as  of 
the  prohibition  against  the  eating  of  blood,  will  be  discussed 
later.i  It  is  only  necessary  to  observe  here  the  parallel  afforded 
by  the  Babylonian  Flood  Story.  There,  as  in  the  Bible,  an  altar 
is  erected,  an  offering  is  prepared,  and  the  gods  smell  the  sweet 
savour.  It  is  plain  that,  at  the  early  period  to  which  the  two 
records  go  back,  it  was  already  felt  that  the  nature  of  deity  was 
less  gross  than  that  of  humankind,  so  that  the  solid  parts  of  the 
sacrifice  were  no  longer  regarded  as  partaken  of  (as  was  originally 
believed,  cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  38),  and  yet  not  so  spiritual  but  that 
the  fragrance  of  the  meat  offered  was  enjoyed.^  So  in  Homer 
it  is  in  the  Kvwny,  the  steam  of  the  sacrifices,  that  the  gods  take 
pleasure.  Another  parallel  offered  by  the  inscriptions  is  that  of 
a  covenant  formed  between  God  and  man.  This  is  an  idea  of 
great  importance  in  Biblical  history,  the  covenant  made  with 
Noah  being  the  first  of  a  series.  A  covenant  formed  between 
men  usually  involves  reciprocal  obligations  on  the  part  of  those 
who  contract  it;  and  in  general  when  God  is  represented  as 
making  a  covenant  with  man,  certain  commands  are  imposed 
on  the  latter,  on  the  due  performance  of  which  the  fulfilment 
of  corresponding  promises  on  the  part  of  God  is  assured.  The 
deepening  sense,  however,  alike  of  human  infirmity  and  of  the 
Divine  goodness  and  unchangeableness  led,  in  later  times,  to 
important  developments  which  will  come  under  review  in  due 
course.^  The  covenant  made  with  Noah  is  necessarily  thought 
of  as  made  with  mankind  as  a  whole,  since  Noah  is  to  be  the 
father  of  a  new  race.     But  in  effect,  the  covenant  is  one  only 

1  See  pp.  93,  144-146. 

^  Language  embodying  the  belief  persisted  in  later  times ;  see  /  ^am. 
xxvi.  19  marg.  *•  See  p.  445. 


62  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

in  name :  it  is  really  an  unconditional  promise  given  by  God. 
There  is,  indeed,  a  command  imposed,  namely,  the  direction 
to  abstain  from  the  use  of  blood;  but  this  is  not  connected 
with  the  declaration  that  the  earth  shall  not  again  be  destroyed 
by  the  waters  of  a  Flood.  Of  such  a  promise,  the  rainbow  was 
to  serve  as  a  reminder :  it  is  not  regarded  as  made  or  created 
for  the  first  time,  but  as  "  set "  or  "  appointed  "  for  a  token  that 
God  would  remember  in  time  of  tempest  the  assurance  He 
had  given  to  all  flesh. 

THE   SONS   OF   NOAH 

The   three   sons   of   Noah  were   Shem,  Ham,   and  Japheth. 

Their  father,  having  planted  a  vineyard  and  made  himself  drunk 

with  the  wine,  lay  uncovered  in  his  tent,   and   Ham   saw  his 

father's  nakedness;  but  his  two  brothers  took  a  garment,  and 

turning  their  faces  backward,  covered  him.     When  Noah  awoke, 

he  learnt  what  Ham  had  done ;  and  he  accordingly  pronounced 

a  blessing  upon  Shem  and  Japheth,  and  a  curse  upon  Canaan, 

the  son  of   Ham,  who  he  prayed  might   be  a   servant   to  his 

brethren. 

Of  the  three  sons  of  Noah  Shem  appears  to  have  been  the  eldest  (see 
X.  2i),  and  the  usual  order  in  which  the  names  are  given  (v.  32,  ix.  18) 
points  to  Japheth  as  being  the  youngest ;  but  the  natural  sense  of  ix.  24 
suggests  that  Ham  was  the  youngest.  Possibly  there  were  variant  tradi- 
tions respecting  their  relative  ages.  It  will  be  seen  later  that  from  Ham 
the  African  peoples  were  thought  to  be  descended,  among  them  being  the 
Egyptians ;  and  the  discredit  cast  upon  Ham  in  the  story  probably  reflects 
national  animosity.  Noah's  curse,  however,  is  represented  as  falling  upon 
Ham's  son,  Canaan,  the  Canaanites  being  the  race  which  eventually  became 
subjected  to  Israel,  the  descendant  of  Shem  (cf.  /  Kgs.  ix.  20-21). 


CHAPTER   II 
THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY 

Sources — Gen.  x.-l.,  i  Ch.  i.  5-ii.  5 

THE  various  peoples  mentioned  in  the  O.T.  are  almost  all 
comprised  within  the  region  bounded  on  the  North  by  the 
Caucasus  Mountains,  the  Euxine,  and  the  Sea  of  Marmora;  on 
the  West  by  the  .'Egean  and  Mediterranean  Seas,  and  the  African 
desert ;  on  the  South  by  Abyssinia  and  the  Indian  Ocean ;  and 
on  the  East  by  the  Persian  Gulf,  the  Caspian  Sea,  and  a  line 
drawn  between  them.  It  is  this  region  which  is  represented 
as  occupied  by  the  descendants  of  Noah,  who  separated  from 
one  another  after  a  brief  sojourn  in  the  plain  of  Shinar  (South 
Babylonia),  whither  they  had  journeyed  from  the  mountains  of 
Ararat  {Gen.  xi.  1-2).  But  the  nations  with  which  the  Biblical 
history  is  mainly  concerned  are  included  within  still  narrower 
limits  than  these — viz.,  the  triangular  space  bordered  on  one  side 
by  the  mountains  of  Kuzistan  and  Kurdistan,  with  their  con- 
tinuation in  Mt.  Masius  and  part  of  the  Taurus,  and  on  the 
other  by  Mt.  Amanus  and  the  Mediterranean,  the  base  being 
formed  by  a  line  stretching  across  Arabia  from  the  head  of  the 
Red  Sea  to  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  And  even  of  this 
triangle  the  centre  was  desert,  the  population  being  gathered  on 
the  mountain  slopts  and  by  the  sea,  or  along  the  two  large 
rivers,  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris,  which  drained  the  Eastern 
portion  of  the  district. 

The  existence  of  a  number  of  nations  speaking  different  languages,  who 
were  nevertheless  believed  to  be  of  one  stock,  is  accounted  for  by  a  stoiy 
which  relates  that  the  descendants  of  Noah  began  to  build  in  Shinar  a  city  to 
serve  as  their  common  abode  and  prevent  their  dispersion,  and  a  high  tower 
to  win  them  a  name,  and  strengthen  common  feelings  of  pride.  But  God, 
anticipating  that,  if  they  succeeded  in  their  purposes,  nothing  would  be  with- 
holden  from  them,  confounded  their  speech,  so  that  they  had  to  relinquish 

63 


64 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


their  project,  and  were  compelled  to  separate  in  different  directions.  The 
name  of  the  city  was,  in  consequence,  called  Babel  (from  balal  **  to  con- 
found," Gen.  xi.  1-9). 

The  reason  for  bringing  a  narrative,  purporting  to  explain  the  present 
variety  of  speech  and  situation  prevailing  amongst  the  peoples  of  the  earth, 
into  connection  with  the  historic  city  of  Babel  {i.e.  Babylon)  is  probably  to  be 
found  in  (i)  the  resemblance  of  the  name  to  the  Hebrew  word  "to  con- 
found";^ (2)  the  existence  in  or  near  Babylon  of  vast  structures  which 
seemed  to  be  heaven-defying  in  character.  Ruins  of  such  occur  both  within 
the  actual  circuit  of  the  ancient  city,  and  at  Borsippa  {Birs  Nimroud) ;  the 
latter  are  those  of  the  Temple  of  Bel  described  by  Herodotus  (i.  181). 

The  following  tables  give  the  connection  assumed  in  Gen.  x.  xi. 

to  subsist  between  the  several  nations  referred  to  in  the  O.T.  and 

the  three  sons  of  Noah  : — 

Noah 


I 
Japheth 


I 
Shem 

Japheth 


Ham 


Gomer        Magog         Madai        Javan        Tubal       Meshech       Tiras 

Shem 

I 


I  I  I 

Elam  Asshur         Arpachshad 

Ham 

I 


"1 1 

Lud        Aram 


Cush 


Mizraim 


Put 


Canaan 


But  though  the  arrangement  of  the  names  is  thus  ostensibly 
based  on  a  genealogical  principle,  the  fact  that  the  peoples 
respectively  allotted  to  each  of  the  sons  of  Noah  are  for  the 
most  part  contiguous  suggests  that  it  has  been  mainly  determined 
by  geographical  position.  To  Japheth  are  assigned  the  nations 
of  the  ^gean  sea-board,  the  parts  of  Asia  Minor  north  of  the 
Taurus,  and  the  districts  immediately  to  the  south  of  the  Caspian 
Sea;  to  Ham,  the  coast  of  Asia  Minor  south  of  the  Taurus, 
portions  of  Arabia,  and  the  north  and  north-east  parts  of  Africa ; 
and  to  Shem,  the  countries  around  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris 
and  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  From  the  point  of  view  of 
modern  ethnology,  it  will  be  eventually  seen  that  two,  at  least, 
of  the  three  groups  contain  members  of  more  than  one  race.^ 

1  The  real  meaning  of  the  name  Babel  is  "  Gate  of  God."     '  See  p.  69. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  65 

(i)  The  Japhetic  peoples — 

Japheth 

I 1 \         \         \  \         I 

Gomer      Magog      Madai     Javan      Tubal      Meshech    Tiras 

I \ 1  I  I  I  f 

Ashkenaz     Riphath    Togarmah         Elishah    Tarshish     Kittim     Dodanim 

Gomer  represents  the  most  northerly  of  known  peoples  (cf.  Ezek. 
xxxviii.  6),  the  Ki/x/Aepioi  of  Homer  {Od,  xi.  14).  They  originally 
came  from  Scythia,  north  of  the  Euxine,  but  crossed  to  Asia 
Minor,  occupied  Cappadocia,  and  following  the  coast,  penetrated 
as  far  as  Lydia  and  Ionia  (Hdt.  iv.  12).  Comer's  descendants 
cannot  be  identified  with  certainty.  Ashkenaz  is  associated  with 
Ararat  (Armenia)  in  Jer.  li.  27,  but  comparison  with  the  names 
Ascanius  and  Ascania  (Horn.  //.  ii.  882,  Verg.  G.  iii.  270)  has 
suggested  a  connection  with  Phrygia  or  Bithynia.  Riphath  (in 
I  Ch.  i.  6  DiphatK)  is  connected  by  Josephus  {Ant,  i.  6)  with 
the  Paphlagonians.  Togarmah  is  mentioned  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  14  as 
sending,  in  exchange  for  the  wares  of  Tyre,  horses  and  mules; 
and  is  identified  by  Josephus  (/.^.)  with  Phrygia,  and  by  others 
with  Armenia. 

Magog  appears  to  be  an  expression  (borrowed  from  Assyrian) 
meaning  "  the  land  of  Gog."  In  Ezek.  xxxix.  2  Gog  comes  from 
the  north;  and  like  the  Scythians,  his  forces  are  horsemen,  and 
armed  with  bows  as  well  as  with  swords  (xxxviii.  4,  xxxix.  3). 

Madai  is  Media,  east  of  the  mountains  of  Kurdistan  and 
south  of  the  Caspian. 

Javan  is  Ionia  and  the  Greek  isles  in  the  Mediterranean  (2  Is. 
Ixvi.  19);  and  in  Daniel  (viii.  21,  xi.  2)  is  used  for  Greece 
generally.  Of  the  descendants  of  Javan,  Elishah,  from  the  isles 
or  coastlands  of  which  Tyre  derived  its  blue  and  purple  {Ezek. 
xxvii.  7)  and  which  must  therefore  have  bordered  on  the  Medi- 
terranean, resembles  the  name  Hellas;  and  Kittim  suggests 
KiTiov,  a  town  in  the  island  of  Cyprus  (cf.  Jer.  ii.  10,  Ezek. 
xxvii.  6)  planted  by  Tyre  (cf.  Is.  xxiii.  i).  In  Dan.  xi.  30,  Kittim 
is  used  vaguely  of  a  western  power  (Rome  being  probably  meant). 
Tarshish  is  associated  with  "the  isles"  in  Fs.  Ixxii.  10,  2  Is. 
Ix.  9 ;  it  could  be  reached  from  Joppa  {/on.  i.  3) ;  was  connected 
with  Tyre  {Is.  xxiii.  6,  10);  and  was  famous  for  its  mines  of  silver 

F 


(^  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  other  minerals  {Jer.  x.  9,  Ezek.  xxvii.  12).  These  data  point 
to  Tartessus,  a  Phoenician  colony  in  Spain  on  the  Bcetis.  In  the 
LXX.  of  Is.  xxiii.  and  Ezek.  xxvii.,  it  is  rendered  by  Kapx^Sojv 
i.e.  Carthage,  which  was  also  founded  by  the  Phoenicians.  For 
Dodanim  the  LXX.  here  and  the  Heb.  of  /  Ch.  i.  7  give  Rodanim^ 
which  has  been  taken  to  represent  the  Rhodians. 

Tubals  Meshech,  and  Tiras  cannot  be  positively  identified. 
The  first  two  are  elsewhere  associated  with  Javan  {2  Is.  Ixvi.  19, 
Ezek.  xxvii.  13)  and  Gog  {Ezek.  xxxviii.  2,  xxxix.  i),  and  may 
represent  the  Tibareni  and  Moschi  south  of  the  Euxine. 

None  of  the  Japhetic  nations  are  at  all  intimately  connected 
with  O.T.  history. 

(2)  The  Hamitic  peoples — 

Ham 

I        . 

I 1 1  I 

Cush        Mizraim         Put        Canaan 

CusH 

I \ 1 1  I 

Seba        Havilah        Sabtah        Raamah        Sabteca 

I 

I  i 

Sheba  Dedan 

Mizraim 

Ludim    Anamim     Lehabim     Naphtuhim    Pathrusim    Casluhim    Caphtorim 

Philistines 
Canaan 

I \ TT         TT         ITT 


Zidon        Heth        Jebusites        Amorites        Girgashites       Hivites 


I i i 1  n 

Arkites        Sinites        Arvadites        Zemarites        Hamathites 

Cush,  associated  with  Egypt  in  Is.  xx.  3,  4,  Ezek.  xxix.  10,  and 
elsewhere,  is  Ethiopia  (the  modern  Nubia) ;  cf.  the  description  of 
the  land  and  people  in  Is.  xviii.  Of  the  sons  of  Cush  Seba  is 
associated  with  Egypt  and  Ethiopia  in  2  Is.  xliii.  3.  Havilah 
is  the  eastern  end  of  the  Arabian  desert  between  Egypt  and 
the  Persian  Gulf  (cf.  Gen.  xxv.  18).  Sabiah  and  Sabteca  are  not 
mentioned  elsewhere,   and  Raamah  only   in    Ezek.  xxvii.    22, 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  67 

amongst  the  trafifickers  with  Tyre  in  spices,  gold,  and  precious 

stones;    they  were  probably  parts  of   Arabia.     Sheba  was  also 

part  of  Arabia  (probably  in  the  south),  and  abounded  in  gold 

and  frankincense  (Ps,  Ixxii.  15,  2  Is.  Ix.  6,  y<?r.  vi.  20).     Dedan 

was  in  the  north  of  Arabia  {Is.  xxi.  13),  and  seems  to  have  been 

regarded  as  bordering  on  Edom  {Ezek.  xxv.  13,  oX.  Jer.  xlix.  8). 

The  connection  of  these  districts  of  Arabia  with  Cush  is  probably 

due  to  the  movements  of  Arab  tribes  across  the  Red  Sea. 

In  Gen.  x.  8  Cush  is  also  said  to  have  begotten  Nimrod,  "the  beginning 
of  whose  kingdom  was  Babel."  This  involves  a  transition  to  a  region  in- 
habited by  the  Shemites,  and  is  due  to  a  confusion  between  Kesh  (Heb.  Cush) 
a  name  for  the  inhabitants  of  Ethiopia,  as  explained  above,  and  the  Kasshii 
or  Cassi,  a  race  who  subjugated  Babylonia  between  the  i6th  and  13th 
centuries  B.C.  Of  Nimrod  himself  nothing  is  known,  beyond  the  state- 
ment that  he  was  a  mighty  hunter  before  Jehovah,  and  built  certain  cities 
in  Assyria. 

Mizraim  is  Egypt.  The  word  (which  is  grammatically  a  dual) 
refers  to  the  two  distinct  regions  of  which  the  country  consists, 
viz  the  triangle  of  the  Delta,  and  the  Nile  valley,  as  far  as  Syene 
(700  miles  from  the  apex  of  the  Delta).  To  the  first  of  these 
the  name  Mazor  was  especially  applied  {Is.  xix.  6,  xxxvii.  25) ; 
the  second  was  properly  designated  Pathros  {Is.  xi.  w^Jer.  xliv.  i, 
Ezek.  xxix.  14).  Of  the  sons  of  Mizraim,  the  Lndim  are  else- 
where associated  with  Egypt  and  Ethiopia  {Jer.  xlvi.  9);  if 
they  are  identical  with  Lud  (see  p.  72),  they  may  have  been 
Lydian  mercenaries  settled  in  Egypt.  The  Anamim^  lehabim^ 
Naphiuhim^  and  Casluhhn  are  unknown,  whilst  the  Faihmsim 
are  the  inhabitants  of  Pathros  (explained  above).  The  Caphtorim 
are  generally  regarded  as  the  people  of  Crete.  The  FhiUsti7ies 
are  here  derived  from  the  Casluhim ;  but  in  Jer.  xlvii.  4,  Am.  ix.  7 
they  are  connected  with  the  Caphtorim  (cf.  also  Deut.  ii.  23). 
This  people  settled  in  the  south-west  corner  of  Palestine  (to 
which  they  gave  their  name),  where  they  formed  a  confederation 
of  five  cities,  Gaza^  Gath^  Ashkelon,  Ekroii^  and  Ashdod.  Gerar 
was  a  little  to  the  south  of  the  first-named  city.  The  Philistines 
were  possibly  tinctured  with  Semitic  usages  and  modes  of 
thought  before  coming  to  Palestine;  they  certainly  became  so 
subsequently  to  their  arrival. 

Put  elsewhere  is  associated  with  nations  widely  separate:  (i) 
with  Egypt,  Cush  and  Ludim  (Lud)  {Jer.  xlvi.  9,  Ezek.  xxx.  5, 


68  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Nah.  iii.  9) ;  (2)  with  Persia  and  Lud  in  the  service  of  Tyre 
(Ezek.  xxvii.  10);  (3)  with  Persia  and  Cush  in  the  service  of 
Gog  {Ezek.  xxxviii.  5).  There  is  said  to  have  been  a  place  called 
Put  Javan  in  Egypt,  which  has  been  taken  to  be  a  city  inhabited 
by  Greek  mercenaries,  which  would  explain  the  various  connec- 
tions in  which  the  name  is  found. ^  Josephus  {Ant.  \.  6,  2)  identi- 
fies it  with  Libya ;  others  with  the  west  shore  of  the  Red  Sea. 

Canaan  in  the  widest  sense  of  the  term  designated  the  whole 
of  the  maritime  coast  between  Cilicia  and  Egypt  (or  from  Mt. 
Amanus  to  Mt.  Seir),  but  the  name  is  more  commonly  used  to 
denote  the  southern  half  only,  within  the  limits  of  which  the 
greater  part  of  the  Bible  history  was  enacted,  the  northern  section 
being  called  Phcenicia.  The  physical  features  of  the  country  were 
such  as  to  separate  it  into  several  clearly-marked  divisions,  which 
were  occupied  by  peoples  distinguished  by  different  appellations, 
and  belonging,  in  some  instances,  to  different  races.  On  the 
north  the  region  was  divided  from  Cilicia  by  Mt.  Amanus ;  and 
a  line  of  hills  branching  off  from  this  ran  through  the  country 
from  north  to  south,  forming,  half-way  down,  two  parallel  ridges  of 
great  height  (about  9,000  feet)  called  Lebanon  and  Anti-Lebanon 
(or  Hermon).2  The  valley  between  them  (known  as  Ccele  Syria) 
was  drained  by  two  rivers,  the  Orontes  and  Leontes  (Litany), 
which  flowed  respectively  north  and  south,  and  eventually  turning 
westward,  entered  the  Mediterranean.  On  the  Orontes  was 
Hamath;  west  of  Lebanon,  on  or  near  the  coast,  were  Arka, 
Zemara,  Arvad^  and  Zidon  (the  two  last  supplying  rowers  to 
Tyre,  Ezek.  xxvii.  8) ;  whilst  the  Sinites  also  dwelt  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Lebanon,  though  their  precise  position  is  not 
known.  Heth^  or  the  Hittites,  came  originally  from  beyond 
the  Taurus  (Cappadocia),  but  advancing  southward  established 
themselves  both  on  the  Euphrates  (Carchemish  being  one  of 
their  chief  cities)  and  in  the  Orontes  valley,  being  generally 
mentioned  in  the  Bible  history  in  connection  with  the  northern 
border  of  Israel  {/ud.  i.  26,  7  Kg,  x.  29),  though  a  few  settle- 
ments were  formed  within  the  limits  of  Canaan  itself,  especially 

^  See  Sayce,  H.  C.  M.,  pp.  136-7. 

'  Called  Sion  in  Deui.  iv.  48.  The  Zidonian  name  was  Sirion,  the  Amorite 
Senir  {Deut.  iii.  9).    In  /  Ch.  v.  23  Senir  and  Herman  seem  to  be  distinguished. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  69 

in  hilly  regions  {Josh.  xi.  3,^  Num.  xiii.  29).  The  name,  how- 
ever, was  sometimes  applied  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  whole 
country  of  Canaan  (see  Gen.  xxvii.  46,  and  c.  xxiii.,  and  cf. 
fosh.  i.  4) ;  and  a  similar  usage  occurs  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions 
of  the  9th  and  8th  centuries.  In  point  of  race  the  Hittites  by 
some  authorities  are  believed  to  have  been  of  Mongolian  origin. 
From  the  east  side  of  Hermon  there  ran  two  streams,  the  Abana 
or  Amana  (modern  Baradd)  and  Pharpar,  which  discharged 
themselves  into  a  marshy  lake,  near  which  Damascus  was  situated. 
A  third  river,  the  Jordan,  which  also  rose  in  Mt.  Hermon,  turned 
southward,  and  after  passing  successively  through  two  lakes 
(Merom  and  Chinnereth),  flowed  through  a  long  and  deep  gorge 
into  the  Dead  Sea  (which  is  1,290  feet  below  the  level  of  the 
Mediterranean).  This  gorge,  on  the  west,  was  separated  from 
the  sea  by  a  range  of  hills,  crossed  by  several  valleys;  and  on 
the  east  was  flanked  by  a  high  and  narrow  plateau,  which  gradually 
merged  into  the  Syrian  desert.  The  only  noteworthy  river  on  the 
west  was  the  Kishon,  which  entered  the  Mediterranean  sea  near 
Carmel  (the  single  promontory  which  breaks  the  coastline) ;  but 
the  eastern  tableland  was  drained  by  three  streams,  the  Jarmuk, 
Jabbok  (the  modern  Zerka)^  and  Arnon,  the  first  flowing  into  the 
Jordan  just  south  of  lake  Chinnereth  (separating  Bashan  the 
region  on  the  north,  from  Gilead  the  district  on  the  south,  of 
the  river),  the  second  entering  the  Jordan  half-way  between  lake 
Chinnereth  and  the  Dead  Sea,  and  the  third  discharging  itself 
into  the  last-named  lake.  The  high  ground  on  both  sides  of  the 
Jordan  was  occupied  by  the  Amorites  (for  the  E.,  see  Nuvi. 
xxi.  31,  Deut.  iii.  8,  iv.  47,  Josh.  xii.  2,  and  for  the  W.  see 
Deut.  i.  7),  a  people  who  seem  to  have  dominated  the  Orontes 
valley  before  the  Hittites,  and  were  subsequently  forced  south- 
ward. Like  the  latter,  their  name  is  sometimes  used  in  the  Bible 
to  designate  the  inhabitants  of  Palestine  collectively  (see  Gen. 
XV.  16,  Josh.  xxiv.  15,  18) ;  and  was  so  employed  by  the  early 
kings  of  Babylon.  The  term  Canaanite  is  often  applied  in  a 
general  sense  to  all  the  peoples  dwelling  between  the  Jordan  and 

^  In  this  passage  the  LXX.  transposes  Hittite  and  Hivite,  placing   the 
Hittites  under  Hermon. 


70  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  sea  (see  Gen,  x.  19),^  this  part  of  the  country  being  some- 
times called  Canaan,  in  a  narrow  sense,  in  contrast  to  Gilead  on 
the  east  of  the  river  (see  Num.  xxxii.  29-30,  Josh.  xxii.  32). 
But  the  Canaanites,  as  distinguished  from  the  other  races 
previously  described,  occupied  (i)  the  sea-coast,  (2)  the  valley 
of  the  Jordan  (see  Josh.  xi.  3 ;  and  cf.  Num.  xiii.  29,  Josh.  v.  i, 
Deut.  xi.  30).  The  remaining  groups,  the  Hivites^  JebusiteSy 
Girgashites^  and  a  fourth  (not  named  in  Gm.  x.),  the  Perizzites? 
were  perhaps  subdivisions  of  the  former  nations,  which  acquired 
separate  appellations  from  local  or  other  circumstances.  The 
Hivites  (whose  name  may  mean  "dwellers  in  encampments") 
are  mentioned  in  connection  with  particular  places  like  Shechem 
{Gen.  xxxiv.  2),  Gibeon  {Josh.  ix.  3,  7),  and  Mount  Lebanon  {Josh. 
xi.  3  (though  see  LXX.  B),  Jud.  iii.  3).  The  Jebusites  were 
the  inhabitants  of  the  town  of  Jebus  or  Jerusalem.  Of  the  Gir- 
gashites  nothing  is  known.  The  Perizzites  are  connected  with 
Bethel  {Gen.  xiii.  3,  7),  Shechem  {Gen.  xxxiv.  30),  mount 
Ephraim,  and  the  territory  afterwards  occupied  by  Judah  and 
Simeon  {Jud.  i.  4) ;  but  the  name  is  perhaps  merely  descriptive, 
in  the  sense  of  villagers  or  country  folk  (cf.  the  Heb.  of  Deut. 
iii.  5).  The  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah^  Admah^  and  Zeboiim 
were  situated  in  the  valley  of  the  Jordan  (called  the  Arabah)^ 
which  contains  the  Dead  Sea,  though  whether  they  lay  at  the 
N.  end  of  the  sea,  or  at  the  S.  (near  Zoar^  which  was  at  the 
S.E.  corner),  is  disputed.  Lasha  is  generally  identified  with 
Calirrhoe  on  the  E.  of  the  Dead  Sea. 

The  use  of  some  of  these  names  is  not  always  uniform.  Hebron  is 
Amorite  in  Gen.  xiii.  18,  xiv.  13,  but  Hittite  in  Gen.  xxiii.  2,  3  ;  and  the 
Amorites  of  Gen.  xlviii.  22  are  Hivites  or  Perizzites  in  xxxiv.  2,  30 :  cf.  also 
Josh.  ix.  7  with  2  Sam.  xxi.  2.  Moreover,  the  Amorite  king  of  Jerusalem 
referred  to  in  Josh.  x.  3  seems  to  be  identical  with  the  king  mentioned  in 
Jud.  i.  5  who  is  reckoned  among  the  Canaanites  and  Perizzites ;  whilst  the 

^  Some  scholars  hold  that  the  terms  Amorites  and  Canaanites  to  describe 
the  people  of  Canaan  W.  of  the  Jordan  are  peculiar  respectively  to  the  sources 
of  the  Hexateuch  denoted  by  the  symbols  E  and  J.  The  data  for  such  a 
conclusion  are  not  very  decisive,  but  Canaanite  is  regularly  used  in  the 
sections  in  Gen.  which  may  with  reason  be  ascribed  to  J  (x.  18,  xii.  6,  xxiv. 
3»  37>  1-  11))  whilst  there  appears  to  be  a  uniform  use  oi  Amorite  mjosh.  xxiv. 
15,  18  which  is  sugt,'estive  of  a  different  source  (which  must  be  E). 

2  It  is  possible  that  the  Perizzites,  since  they  are  not  named  amongst  the 
sons  of  Canaan  in  Gen.  x.  15  foil.,  and  are  coupled  with  the  Rephaim  in 
/osh.  xvii.  15,  were,  like  the  latter,  an  aboriginal  race  (see  p.  73). 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY 


71 


Amorites  of  Deut.  i.  44  are  the  Canaanites  and  Amalekites  of  Num.  xiv.  45. 
The  last-named  people  are  mostly  represented  as  occupying  the  south  of 
Judaea  and  the  neighbouring  wilderness  (see  Gen.  xiv.  7,  Num.  xiii.  29, 
of.  /  Sam.  XV.  7,  xxvii.  8),  but  were  also  found  in  the  peninsula  of  Sinai 
{Ex.  xvii.  8).i 


(3)  The  Semitic  peoples — 


Shem 


Elam 


Asshur  Arpachshad 

Shelah^ 
Eber* 


Lud 


Aram 
I 


Hul    Gether    Mash» 


I 

Peleg 

Reu 

I 
Serug 

Nahor 

Terah 

1 


Joktan 


I  I 

Almodad  Sheleph 


\ \ 

Hazarmaveth  Jerah 


Hadoram         Uzal         Diklah 


Obal'       Abimael 


Sheba 


I 
Ophir 


I 
Havilah 


Jobab 


I \  I 

Abram      Nahor      Haran 


Ela7n  consisted  of  the  mountainous  country,  with  the  marsh 
lands  at  its  base,  which  was  situated  at  the  head  of  the  Persian 
Gulf.     Its  chief  city  was  Shushan  or  Susa  (cf.  Dan.  viii.  2). 

Asshur  was  Assyria,  the  country  lying  along  the  middle  course 
of  the  Tigris  and  its  affluent  the  lower  Zab;  its  extent  varied 
considerably  at  different  times. 

Arpachshad  probably  represents  Babylonia  (the  latter  half  of 
the  name  being  practically  identical  with  the  word  Chesed,^  from 

^  In  Gen.  xiv.  7  Amalekites  are  represented  as  existing  in  Abram's  time, 
but  in  xxxvi.  12  Amalek  is  the  son  of  Abram's  descendant  Esau. 

-  The  LXX.  inserts  another  step  in  the  genealogy,  making  Kat^aj'  the  son  of 
Arpachshad  and  the  father  of  Shelah. 

'  In  /  Ch.  i,  17  Meshech. 

*  From  Eber  the  name  Hebrew  is  derived,  and  according  to  the  above 
table  of  descent,  would  apply  to  the  Arabian  tribes  derived  from  Joktan  as 
well  as  to  the  descendants  of  Peleg.  If  taken  to  mean  those  who  had  come 
in  the  person  of  Abraham  from  "  the  other  side  "  {eber)  of  the  Euphrates,  it 
applied  to  several  peoples  beside  the  Israelites,  who  had  an  exclusive  claim  to 
the  title  only  as  immigrants  into  Canaan  from  "  the  other  side  "  of  the  Jordan. 
The  LXX.  renders  it  by  6  irepaTrjs.  ^  In  /  Ck.  i.  22  Eba/. 

*  The  name  C/iesed  occurs  amongst  the  sons  of  Nahor  in  Gen.  xxii.  22. 


72  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

which  comes  the  plural  Chasdim,  the  usual  Hebrew  appellation  for 
the  Babylonians  (cf.  Joseph.  Ant  i.  6,  4).  This  was  the  level 
country  between  the  lower  waters  of  the  Tigris  and  Euphrates  as 
far  as  the  Persian  Gulf,  Shinar  (Gen.  x.  10)  being  another  name 
for  it.  From  Arpachshad,  and  his  son  and  grandson  Shelah  and 
Eber^  were  derived,  on  the  one  hand  (through  Joktan)  a  number 
of  Arabian  tribes  Sheba,  Havilah  and  others,  and  on  the  other 
hand  (through  Pekg  and  his  line)  Terah  and  his  descendants, 
who  will  be  considered  later. 

Lud  is  unknown,  but  is  perhaps  to  be  identified  with  Lydia 
(cf.  Jos.  Ani.  i.  6,  4). 

Aram  comprised  (i)  the  country  embraced  within  the  upper 
course  of  the  Euphrates  and  its  tributary  the  Chaboras  (Habor) 
(Aram-naharaim) ;  (2)  the  district  between  the  Euphrates  and  the 
Orontes,  with  the  country  of  which  Damascus  was  the  centre.^ 
Of  the  sons  of  Aram  little  is  known. 

It  will  be  observed  that  there  are  some  inconsistencies  in  the  genealogical 
tables  given  above.  Thus  Sheba,  Havilah,  and  Dedan  are  represented  in 
Ge7i.  X.  7  as  descendants  of  Ham  ;  but  in  x.  28,  29,  and  xxv.  3  as  descendants 
of  Shem.  The  Ludivi,  if  the  same  as  Lud,  are  likewise  assigned  to  Ham  in 
X.  13,  but  to  Shem  in  x.  22.  Aram,  who,  in  Gen.  x.  22,  is  the  brother  of 
Arpachshad,  appears,  in  Gen.  xxii.  20,  among  the  latter's  descendants ; 
whilst  Uz,  who  is  the  son  of  Aram  in  x.  23,  is  his  uncle  in  xxii.  20.  The 
name  of  Uz  occurs  in  connection  with  Edom  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  28,  Lam.  iv.  21. 

As  has  been  said,  the  distribution  of  the  various  countries 
named  in  Gen.  x.  between  the  sons  of  Noah  has  been  made  on 
geographical  rather  than  ethnological  lines.  But  between  the 
Babylonians,  Assyrians,  Arameans  and  the  Arabian  tribes  repre- 
sented as  descended  from  Joktan  there  seems  to  have  been 
actual  kinship.  Allied  also  with  these  were  the  Canaanites, 
whose  assignment  to  Ham  rather  than  to  Shem  is  doubtless  due 
to  Hebrew  sentiment.  The  centre  from  which  this  group  of 
peoples  originally  dispersed  was  probably  N.  Arabia.  From  this 
region  some  moved  southward  and  occupied  the  S.W.  coast  of 
the  peninsula.  A  portion  of  these  appear  to  have  crossed  the 
Red   Sea  and    established    themselves    in   Ethiopia.^      Others 

^  Amongst  the  places  occupied  by  Aram  were  Zobah  {2  Sam.  x.  6,  8). 
Beth-rehob  {2  Sam.  x.  6),  and  Maacah  (/  Ch.  xix.  6). 

'  The  connection  between  Arabia  and  Ethiopia  finds  expression  in  the 
relationship,  described  in  Gen.  x.  7,  of  Sheba,  Havilah,  and  Dedan  to  Cush. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  73 

advanced  eastward,  and  settled  in  Babylonia,  which  became  a 
starting-point  for  fresh  movements.  There  the  new  settlers  united 
with  a  population  of  diverse  origin,  to  which  the  names  Sumerian 
and  Accadian  have  been  given,  and  over  which  they  obtained 
ascendency  about  2300  B.C.  A  number  of  cities  were  built  and 
rose  to  power,  among  them  being  Accad,^  Erech,^  Babel  (Babylon), 
Ur,8  and  Larsa  (Ellasar).^  The  rulers  of  some  of  these  cities 
claim,  in  their  inscriptions,  to  have  extended  their  sway  not  only 
over  the  neighbouring  countries  of  Elam  and  E.  Arabia,  but  even 
over  Palestine.  From  Babylonia  an  advance  was  made  northward, 
and  the  cities  of  Asshur  and  Nineveh  were  founded,  the  surround- 
ing region  receiving  its  name  (Assyria)  from  the  first-mentioned 
place  (cf.  Gen.  x.  10-12). 

Corroboration  of  a  Babylonian  conquest  of  Palestine  has  been  furnished 
by  the  discovery  at  Tell  el  Amarna  of  a  large  number  of  tablets  (inscribed 
with  cuneiform  writing  and  dating  from  the  15th  and  14th  centuries  B.C.) 
which  purport  to  be  letters  despatched  by  Egyptian  governors  or  vassal 
princes  in  Canaan  to  their  sovereign. °  The  fact  that  cuneiform  writing, 
which  was  of  Babylonian  origin,  was  the  medium  of  correspondence  in 
Canaan  even  after  it  had  fallen  under  Egyptian  control  points  to  a  long 
prevalence  of  Babylonian  influence  in  that  country. 

Another  body,  starting  from  Kir,  a  district  supposed  to  be 
near  the  lower  Euphrates,  and  following  that  river,  occupied 
Aram-naharaim.  The  connection  of  this  Aramean  settlement 
with  Babylonia  is  indicated  by  the  town  of  Haran,  the  name 
of  which  is  said  to  be  Sumerian,  whilst  its  chief  temple  was 
dedicated  to  Sin,  the  Babylonian  moon-god.  A  third  body 
likewise  followed  the  Euphrates,  and  crossing  it  at  its  upper 
course,  moved  westward  until  they  reached  Canaan.  The  country 
was  perhaps  at  the  time  already  occupied  by  the  Amorites  and 
Hittites ;  whilst  remnants  of  an  aboriginal  race  of  great  stature, 
called  the  A7iakim  or  Rephawi,  existed  in  various  places,  surviving 
even  to  comparatively  late  times.^     The  Canaanite  immigrants, 

*  Conjectured  to  be  Agade,  N.  of  Babylon. 

'  Its  site  has  been  found  at  Warka.  100  miles  S.E.  of  Babylon. 
'  Its  site  is  usually  identified  with  El  Mugheir,  on  the  right  bank  of  the 
lower  Euphrates,  about  125  miles  from  the  mouth  of  the  river. 
^  In  S.  Babylonia,  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris. 
^  See  p.  168. 

•  See  Gen.  xiv.  5,  xv.  20,  Dent.  ii.  10- 11,  iii.  ii^Josh.  xii.  4,  xiii.  T2. 


74  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

as  has  been  shown,  settled  chiefly  on  the  coast ;  and  from  thence 
penetrated  through  the  valleys  to  the  gorge  of  the  Jordan. 

Israel,  whose  destinies  form  the  subject  of  the  O.T.  Scrip- 
tures, is  represented  as  descended  from  Arpachshad,  as  shown  in 
the  following  table,^  viewed  in  connection  with  those  previously 

given. 

Terah 

\ 

i \ 1 

Abram  Nahor  Haran 
I I  I 

Ishmael  Isaac  Midian,  etc      Bethuel     1 1  other  sons        Lot 

I         1-^  I  r-H     . 

12  sons      Esau    Jacob  Laban  Moab     Ben  Ammi 

(Edom)  (Israel)  (Ammon) 

From  the  above  table,  Israel  appears  closely  allied  to  Edom, 
Moab,  and  Ammon,  and  also  to  Ishmael,  Midian,  and  other 
Arabian  tribes.  Its  history  begins  with  the  migration  of  all  these 
kindred  tribes,  in  the  person  of  their  ancestor  Terah,  from 
Babylonia.  As  has  been  related,  Babylonian  enterprise  had 
at  an  early  date  penetrated  to  Palestine ;  and  following  the 
track  thus  opened  up,  the  allied  peoples  of  Edom,  Moab, 
Ammon,  and  Israel  left  the  neighbourhood  of  the  city  of  Ur 
and  entered  upon  a  movement  westward.  The  course  taken  was 
by  way  of  Haran  in  Aram  ;  ^  and  thence  presumably  to  Hamath 
and  Damascus.  From  the  latter  city,  the  route  would  naturally 
divide.  Of  the  four  peoples  named,  Edom  took  possession  of 
Mount  Seir  (the  hilly  district  lying  S.  of  the  Dead  Sea  and 
E.  of  the  Arabah),  dispossessing  therefrom  the  native  Horites; 
whilst  Moab  established  itself  E.  of  the  Dead  Sea,  and  Ammon 
settled  on  the  E.  flank  of  the  Amorite  kingdom  which  extended 
from  the  Arnon  to  the  Jabbok  {Num.  xxi.  24),  expelUng  the 
aboriginal  Emim  and  Rephaim,  whom  the  Ammonites  called 
Zamzummim   {Deut.  ii.  9-22).      Israel   settled   in   the   country 

^  See  Gen.  xi.  27,  xvi.  16,  xxi.  I-3,  xxv.  I-4,  xxii.  20-24,  xxv.  12  foil., 
19-26,  xxiv.  15,  29,  xix.  30  foil. 

2  In  Gen.  xxiv.  4,  10,  Deui.  xxvi.  5,  Aram  (Aram-naharaim)  is  represented 
as  the  home  of  Israel's  ancestors ;  and  by  some  Ur  has  been  placed  in 
N.  Mesopotamia.  The  description,  in  Josh.  xxiv.  3,  of  Al>raham's  home  as 
beyond  the  river  (Euphrates)  is  not  strictly  true  of  El  Mugheir^  which  is  on 
the  right  bank. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  75 

W.  of  the  Jordan,  the  districts  with  which  they  are  more 
particularly  brought  into  connection  in  Genesis  being  Shechem, 
Bethel,  Kiriath-Arba  (Hebron),  and  Beersheba.  Their  history 
during  this  period  is  chiefly  associated  with  three  patriarchs, 
Abram  (Abraham),  Isaac,  and  Jacob  (or  Israel),  the  first  of 
whom  appears  to  have  reached  Canaan  before  2300  B.C. 

Some  two  centuries  after  this  date,  lower  Egypt  was  conquered 
and  occupied  by  a  body  of  Asiatics  called  Hyksos,^  who 
established  themselves  at  Tanis  (Zoan),  the  authority  of  the 
native  princes  being  restricted  to  Thebes ;  and  the  possession 
of  Egypt  by  these  invaders  from  Asia  naturally  attracted  others 
to  the  country.  Some  time  prior  to  1600  B.C.  (the  date  assigned 
for  the  eventual  expulsion  of  the  Hyksos  from  Egypt)  the 
Israelites,  who  were  now  divided  into  several  tribes,  finally 
migrated  from  Canaan  (no  doubt  in  consequence  of  scarcity  of 
food)  to  the  banks  of  the  Nile,  and  settled  in  a  district  called 
Goshen,  E.  of  the  Delta.  The  position  of  this  region  (which, 
in  Gen.  xlvii.  11,  is  termed  "the  land  of  Rameses")  seems  fixed 
by  the  discovery  of  Pithom,  one  of  the  "  store-cities,"  afterwards 
built  by  the  Israelites  for  their  rulers,  which  has  been  found  a  little 
to  the  S.W.  of  the  modern  Ismailia.^  Being  left  there  to  pursue 
without  molestation  their  pastoral  life,  they  rapidly  increased  in 
numbers  and  strength.  The  history  of  the  entry  into  Egypt  is 
connected  particularly  with  the  name  of  Joseph,  who  is  re- 
presented as  one  of  the  sons  of  Jacob. 

The  Bible  narrative  relates  that  Terah,  leaving  Ur  of  the  Chalrlees  for 
Canaan,  died  at  Haran,  and  that  Abraham,  with  his  wife  Sarai,  proceeded 
thence  to  their  original  destination,  in  obedience  to  a  Divine  monition  which 
was  accompanied  by  the  assurance  that  he  would  have  an  extensive  posterity, 
and  that  his  good  fortune  would  be  such  that  his  name  would  become  current 
in  formulas  of  blessing.^  The  subsequent  history  of  the  patriarchs  as  given 
in  Genesis  (xii.-l)  is  as  follows : — 

(i)  Abram,  with  his  wife  and  his  nephew  Lot,  crossing  the  Jordan,*  advanced, 
by  way  of  Shechem  (where  Jehovah  appearing  to  him  promised  the  land  to 
his  seed)  and  Bethel,  towards  the  south  part  of  what  was  afterwards  Judaea. 

^  Their  racial  connections  are   unknown ;    and   both   a   Semitic   and   a  ^v^ 

Ilittite  origin  have  been  assigned  to  them.  An  account  of  them  is  given  by 
Manetho,  preserved  in  Josephus,  c.  Ap.  i.  14. 

"^  See  Sayce,  H.  C.  M.  p.  240. 

*  On  Gen.  xii.  3  see  p.  97,  note. 

■*  Presumably  by  the  fords  near  Bethshan. 


^6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Thence  he  was  driven  by  fcimine  into  Egypt,  where  the  beauty  of  his  wife 
(who  at  her  husband's  direction  had  passed  herself  off  as  his  sister)  ^  attracted 
the  notice  of  the  Pharaoh,^  who  took  her ;  but  in  consequence  of  divinely- 
sent  plagues,  restored  her.  Returning  to  the  south  of  Canaan,  he  found  his 
substance  so  increased  that  at  Bethel  he  was  compelled  to  separate  from 
his  nephew,  recei%-ing  there  at  the  same  time  a  renewal  of  the  promise 
respecting  the  future  extent  of  his  posterity  and  its  possession  of  Canaan. 
Lot  settled  in  Sodom,  whilst  Abram  himself  dwelt  near  Kiriath  -  Arba 
(Hebron),  entering  into  an  alliance  with  three  Amorite  chieftains,  Mamre, 
Eshcol,  and  Aner.  Sodom,  with  four  neighbouring  cities,  Gomorrah,  Admah, 
Zeboiim  and  Bela  (Zoar)  were  at  this  time  subject  to  an  Elamite  dynasty 
ruling  in  Babylonia,  which  had  re-asserted  the  authority  once  exercised  in 
Palestine  by  the  native  Babylonian  princes.^  But  a  revolt,  headed  by  the 
king  of  Sodom,  was  made  against  the  Elamite  rule ;  and  to  suppress  it, 
the  Elamite  king  Chedor-laomer  invaded  the  country  in  company  with  his 
allies  Amraphel  of  Shinar,  Arioch  of  Ellasar  (Larsa),  and  Tidal,  perhaps  of 
Gutim.*  The  route  followed  was  through  the  country  E.  of  Jordan  and  the 
Dead  Sea  as  far  as  El-paran  (probably  the  later  Elath),  thence  N.  and  W.  by 
En-mishpat  (the  later  Kadesh  Barnea)  and  Haiazon-tamar  (Engedi)  to  the 
vale  of  Siddim,^  near  Sodom  and  the  marge  of  the  Dead  Sea.  There  a  battle 
was  fought,  the  king  of  Sodom  and  his  allies  were  defeated,  and  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  plundered,  Lot  being  included  among  the  captives.  Abram,  on 
hearing  of  the  capture  of  his  relative,  armed  his  trained  slaves,  numbering 
318,  and  with  his  Amorite  confederates  went  in  chase  of  the  enemy  as 
they  retired  in  the  direction  of  Damascus,  and  in  a  night  attack  near  Laish 
or  Leshem  (the  later  Dan),  which  was  followed  by  a  pursuit  as  far  as  Hobah 
(N.  of  Damascus),  succeeded  in  recovering  both  the  captives  and  the  spoiL 
On  his  return  he  was  blessed  by  Melchizedek  the  priest-king  of  Salem  (Urusalim 
or  Jerusalem),  to  whom  he  gave  a  tenth  of  the  booty  taken,  at  the  same  time 
refusing  for  himself  a  share  of  the  spoils,  and  accepting  it  only  for  his  Amorite 
companions. 

Abram  at  this  period  had  no  son,  but  he  was  again  assured  in  a  vision  that 
he  would  have  a  numerous  posterity ;  and  on  his  requesting  a  sign,  he  was 
told  to  offer  a  sacrifice,  and  after  dividing  the  victims,  to  place  the  several 
portions  opposite  each  other.  Then  at  sunset  Abram  fell  into  a  deep  sleep, 
and  in  the  darkness,  fire  and  flame  passed  between  the  pieces,  and  Jehovah 
made  a  covenant  with  him,  declaring  that  his  descendants,  after  a  period 
of  enslavement  in  a  foreign  land,  would  eventually  possess  Canaan.  Subse- 
quently his  wife  gave  to  him  her  handmaid  Hagar,  an  Egyptian,  who 
conceived  by  him  ;  but  before  the  child's  birth  she  was  harshly  treated  by 
Sarai  (whose  barrainess  she  now  despised)  and  fled,  only  returning  by 
command  of  an  angel,  who  appeared  to  her  by  a  well  afterwards  willed 

*  She  was  in  reality  his  half-sister  {^Gen.  xx.  12). 

'  The  use  of  the  title  in  connection  with  this  period  is  an  anachronism,  the 
word  not  being  applied  to  the  king  until  the  iSth  dynasty;  see  Hastings' 
Diet.  Bible,  sub  voce. 

^  See  above,  p.  73. 

^  This  is  a  correction  of  the  received  reading  Goiim  in  Gen.  xiv.  i,  which 
only  means  "  nations." 

^  If  this  was  at  the  S.  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  and  was  subsequently  submerged 
(see  xiv.  3),  Hazazon-tamar  is  probably  not  Engedi  (near  the  middle  of  the  VV. 
shore),  but  Kurnub,  a  village  lying  W.S.W.  of  the  lake;  see  Driver,  Gen.  ad loc. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  77 

Beer-lahai-roi,^  and  who  foretold  the  child's  destiny.  The  son  whom  she 
bore  was  named  Ishmael.  Thirteen  years  after  this,  the  Divine  promises 
were  for  the  fifth  time  renewed  to  Abram,  to  whom  it  was  declared  that  his 
wife  should  bear  a  son.  The  names  of  both  his  wife  and  himself  were 
changed  from  Abram  and  Sarai  to  Abraham  and  Sarah,  ^  and  the  practice  of 
circumcision'  was  invested  with  a  religious  significance.  Subsequently  the 
assurance  that  Sarah  should  have  a  son  was  repeated  by  three  celestial 
visitants  in  human  form,^  who  also  intimated  that  Sodom  and  Gomorrah 
(where  Lot  still  dwelt)  would  be  destroyed  for  their  wickedness,  which 
was  too  great  for  Abraham's  intercession  to  avail  to  save  them.  The  cities 
were  afterwards  consumed  by  fire,^  Lot  being  led  out  of  Sodom  by  two 
angels.  On  the  way,  his  wife,  disobeying  the  command  not  to  look  back,  ^ 
was  turned  into  a  pillar  of  salt.^  Lot  took  refuge  in  a  cave  near  Zoar,^  and 
there  unwittingly  became  by  his  two  daughters  the  father  of  two  sons,  Moab 
and  Ben  Ammi,  the  ancestors  of  the  Moabites  and  Ammonites.  Abraham 
next  journeyed  again  to  the  South,  and  sojourned  at  Gerar,  where  the 
incident  which  had  occurred  in  Egypt  was  repeated  in  connection  with  the 
king  of  Gerar,  Abirtuiech,  with  whom  also  Abraham  had  a  quarrel  respecting 
certain  wells  of  wat^r,  which  was  brought  to  a  close  by  a  covenant  between 
them  at  Beershebajj  Eventually  Sarah  became  a  mother,  and  bore  to  her 
husband  a  son  vh"^ '  was  named  Isaac.  Ishmael,  being  detected  mocking 
Isaac,  was,  on  ^barah's  appeal,  expelled  with  his  mother  Hagar ;  and 
ultimately  made  his  home  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran.  After  this,  Abraham, 
in  obedience  to  a  divine  command,  given  to  prove  him,  prepared  to  sacri- 
fice his  only  son  Isaac  on  a  mountain  in  the  land  of  Moriah,'  three  days' 
journey  from  Beersheba ;  but  when  the  preparations  were  completed,  he  was 

*  i.e.  "the  well  of  the  Living  One,  my  beholder." 

^  Abram  (of  which  Abiram  is  another  form)  may  mean  "  the  father  is 
exalted"  {cLJehoram) ;  but  the  analogy  oi Abijah  ("Jah  is  father")  suggests 
that  it  signifies  "Ram  (?  Ramman)  is  father."  Abraham  is  probably  only  a 
dialectic  variation  of  Abram  ;  but  in  Gen.  xvii.  5  the  latter  part  of  the  name 
is  brought  into  relation  with  the  word  hdmdn  "multitude,"  and  the  appellation 
is  made  to  signify  "father  of  a  multitude  of  nations."  Sarai  and  Sarah  are 
also  probably  varieties  of  a  single  name,  meaning  "princess." 

'  See  p.  93. 

*  Jehovah  is  regarded  as  speaking  through  each  of  the  three  indifferently, 
see  xviii.  16-17,  22,  xix.  i,  17-18  (marg.). 

^  The  neighbourhood  abounds  in  bitumen,  which  could  easily  be  ignited 
by  lightning. 

*  Parallels  to  this  command  to  refrain  from  observing  a  supernatural  act 
are  furnished  by  Hom.  Od.  v.  348-350,  x.  526-528. 

'  At  the  southern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea  masses  of  rock-salt  are  said 
to  occur,  of  which  some  detached  block  or  pillar  may  have  given  rise  to 
the  story. 

^  Zoar  was  probably  at  the  foot  of  the  mountains  of  Moab,  Gen.  xix.  30, 
cf.  Is.  XV.  5. 

*  Identified  by  Josephus  {Ant.  i.  13,  2,  vii.  13,  4)  with  Mt.  Moriah,  upon 
which  the  Temple  was  built  {2  Ch.  iii.  i).  But  the  nearness  of  the  city  of 
Jerusalem  is  an  objection  to  this  identification ;  and  as  the  LXX.  uses  the 
same  rendering  for  Moriah  and  Moreh  {Gen.  xii.  6),  some  have  thought 
Gerizim  to  be  intended,  which  was  near  Shechem,  where  the  terebinth  of 
Moreh  stood. 


78  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

forbidden  to  harm  his  son,  and  substituted  instead  a  ram.  In  consequence  of 
his  trust  in  Jehovah  and  his  readiness  to  sacrifice,  in  accordance  with  His 
injunctions,  the  child  upon  whom  his  hojjes  rested,  the  blessings  previously 
assured  to  him  were  for  the  seventh,  and  last,  time^  renewed.  Sarah  died 
subsequently  to  this,  and  was  buried  in  the  cave  at  Machpelah  near  Kiriath- 
Arba  (Hebron)  which  Abraham  had  purchased.  By  another  wife^  named 
Keturah  Abraham  became  the  progenitor  of  several  sons,  Midian,  Medan 
and  others.  Before  his  death,  he  sent  his  servant  to  Bethuel,  the  son  of  his 
brother  Nahor,  who  still  dwelt  in  Haran,  to  arrange  a  marriage  between 
Isaac  and  Bethuel's  daughter  Rebekah.  Abraham  was  175  years  old  when 
he  died  ;  and  was  buried  with  his  wife  at  Machpelah. 

(2)  Isaac  ^  dwelt  principally  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Beer-lahai-roi  and 
Beersheba.  His  wife  bore  him  two  sons,  twins,  who  struggled  even  before 
their  birth.  The  elder,  called  Esau,  who  was  ruddy  and  hairy,  became 
a  hunter,  and  was  the  favourite  of  his  father,  whilst  the  younger,  named 
Jacob,  was  quiet  in  character,  and  the  favourite  of  his  mother.  Jacob 
obtained  his  brother's  birthright^  in  exchange  for  a  dish. of  lentil  pottage, 
when  Esau  was  weary  with  hunting.  The  divine  baebmises  made  to 
Abraham  were  repeated  to  Isaac ;  whose  wife  Rebelcah  had  at  Gerar 
(whither  famine  had  driven  them)  the  same  experience",  "".s  Sarah.  Isaac, 
too,  like  Abraham,  had  a  dispute  about  certain  wells  :d>^h  the  people  of 
Gerar  and  their  king  Abimelech,  which  was  again  clostn  by  a  covenant. 
Removing  to  Beersheba,  he  again  received  a  renewal  of  the  promises  given 
to  him  and  his  father.  A  well  which  his  servants  digged  shortly  afterwards 
was  called  Shibah  (apparently  in  allusion  to  the  oath  (Shebtiah)  which  had 
passed  between  him  and  Abimelech).^  When  old  and  blind  and  nearing  his 
death  Isaac  desired  to  bless  his  elder  son ;  but  Jacob,  by  the  suggestion 
of  his  mother,  personated  his  brother  in  his  absence,  and  secured  the 
blessing.  To  shield  him  from  Esau's  anger  (or  according  to  another  account, 
to  prevent  him  from  marrying,  like  Esau,  Canaanite  wives)  ^  Jacob  was 
sent  away  to  the  home  of  his  mother  (variously  described  as  Haran 
or  Paddan-aram).  Isaac  died  at  Kiriath-Arba  (Hebron)  at  the  age  of  180, 
and  was  buried  by  his  two  sons  (who,  as  will  be  related,  had  become 
reconciled)  at  Machpelah.  ^ 

^  The  passages  relating  the  Divine  promises  to  Abraham  are  (i)  xii.  2-3, 
(2)  xii.  7,  (3)  xiii.  14-17,  (4)  c.  xv.,  (5)  c.  xvii.,  (6)  c.  xviii.,  (7)  xxii.  15  foil. 

^  Called  a  concubine  in  /  Ch.  i.  32 ;  cf.  Gen.  xxv.  6. 

3  The  name,  derived  from  tsahak  "  to  laugh,"  is  variously  explained  as  due 
to  Abraham's  laughing  in  mockery  {Gen.  xvii.  17,  P),  to  Sarah's  laughing  in 
mockery  (xviii.  12,  J),  or  to  Sarah's  laughing  in  joy  (xxi.  6,  E).  It  is  perhaps 
m  reality  shortened  from  Isaac-el  (cf.  Islimael). 

■*  This  carried  with  it  the  larger  portion  of  the  inheritance  {Deut.  xxi.  17). 

^  With  this  ihe  narrator  in  xxvi.  33  connects  the  name  of  Beersheba; 
contrast  xxi.  31,  where  Beersheba  is  connected  with  sheba,  "seven." 

^  There  is  an  obvious  inconsistency  (due  to  the  narrative,  as  a  whole,  being 
derived  from  two  sources)  between  the  account  which  represents  Jacob  as  sent 
to  Haran  to  escape  his  brother's  anger,  and  that  which  explains  that  he  was 
sent  to  Paddan  Aram  to  prevent  him  from  following  his  brother's  example. 
The  former  impUes  that  Isaac  was  then  on  his  death-bed  ;  but  the  latter 
makes  him  only  100  (cf.  xxv.  26  with  xxvi.  34),  his  death  not  taking  place 
until  he  was  180  (xxxv.  28). 

'  See  Gen.  xlix.  31. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  79 

(3)  Jacob,^  while  on  his  way  to  Aram,  saw  in  a  dream,  whilst  sleeping, 
a  ladder  or  flight  of  steps  reaching  from  earth  to  heaven,  and  angels  ascending 
and  descending  on  it ;  and  the  promises  made  to  his  fathers  that  his  posterity 
should  be  numerous,  and  should  possess  the  land  wherein  he  was,  were  once 
more  repeated.  On  awaking,  Jacob  set  up  and  consecrated  with  oil  the  stone 
on  which  his  head  had  rested,"  and  called  the  place,  or  the  stone,  Bethel. 
On  reaching  Aram,  he  was  received  by  Laban  the  brother  of  Rebekah ;  and 
agreed  to  serve  him  seven  years  for  his  younger  daughter  Rachel.  On  the 
conclusion  of  this  period,  Laban  deceived  him  by  substituting  (as  the  custom 
of  veiling  the  bride  enabled  him  to  do)  his  elder,  and  less  well-favoured, 
daughter  Leah.  Jacob,  however,  agreed  to  serve  another  seven  years  for 
Rachel ;  and  with  Laban's  two  daughters  he  likewise  received  two  hand- 
maids, Zilpah  and  Bilhah.  By  his  wives  and  their  handmaids  he  had, 
besides  a  daughter  Dinah,  twelve  sons,  as  follows :  Reuben,  Simeon,  Levi, 
Judah,  Issachar,  Zebulun  (by  Leah) ;  Dan,  Naphtali  (by  Bilhah) ;  Gad, 
Asher  (by  Zilpah) ;  Joseph,  Benjamin^  (by  Rachel).  After  marrying  Laban's 
two  daughters,  he  served  his  father-in-law  six  years  longer  on  condition  of 
receiving  all  the  future  offspring  of  Laban's  flocks  which  were  of  exceptional 
colour.  He  increased  the  number  of  these  by  a  device  at  the  time  of  breeding, 
and  became  so  wealthy  that  he  excited  the  envy  of  Laban's  sons ;  and  by 
Divine  direction  he  determined  to  depart  secretly  with  his  wives,  of  whom 
Rachel,  before  their  departure,  stole  her  father's  teraphim.^  Laban,  on 
learning  of  the  flight,  pursued  and  overtook  Jacob  in  Gilead,  where  after 
mutual  recrimination,  they  made  a  covenant  with  each  other.  After  separat- 
ing from  Laban,  Jacob  was  met  on  his  way  by  the  angels  of  God,  and  called 
the  place  of  the  meeting  Mahanaivi.^  Fearing  his  brother's  resentment,  he 
sent  messengers  to  the  country  where  he  now  dwelt  (Seir  or  Edom),  with 
presents  to  seek  his  favour,  whilst  he  made  arrangements,  in  the  event  of 
an  attack,  for  part  of  his  company  to  escape.  On  the  way,  near  Pcnuel,* 
he  wrestled  with  a  supernatural  antagonist,  who  by  a  touch  rendered  him 
lame,  but  whom  he  would  not  release  until  he  blessed  him.  His  antagonist 
thereupon  changed  his  name  to  Israel  (interpreted  to  mean  "a  perseverer 
with  God"),''  and  added  (according  to  the  LXX.)  a  promise  that  he 
who  had  power  with  God  should  also  prevail  over  men.  The  subsequent 
interview  with  Esau,  who  came  to  meet  him,  proved  friendly,  and  when  the 
latter  departed  to  Seir,  Jacob  took  up  his  position  first  at  Succoth  and  then 
near  Shechem,  buying  a  plot  of  ground  there.  A  proposal  for  intermarrying, 
made  by  Hamor,  the  prince  of  the  land  (whose  son,  according  to  one  account, 

^  The  name  (from  akab)  is  explained  in  Gen.  xxv.  26  to  mean  "one  that 
takes  by  the  heel,  overreaches,"  with  an  allusion  to  the  fact  that  when  he  was 
born,  his  hand  had  hold  of  his  twin-brother's  heel.  But  another  meaning  of 
akab  is  "to  reward,"  and  the  name  may  be  shortened  ixom  Jacob-el  in  the 
sense  of  "God  rewards." 

^  For  offerings  made  to  boulders  or  stones  cf.  2  Is.  Ivii.  6. 
^  Benjamin  was  born  in  Aram  according  to  xxxv.  24-26,  but  in  Canaan 
according  to  xxxv.  16-18. 

*  The  teraphim  were  perhaps  figures  of  tutelary  deities,  and  it  has  been 
suggested  that  Rachel  wished  to  carry  with  her  the  fortune  of  her  home. 

*  i.e.  two  companies. 

'  The  name  Penuel  means  "face  of  God." 

'  The  real  meaning  of  the  name  is  "God  perseveres."  Accordinti  to 
xxxv.  10,  15  Jacob's  name  was  changed  at  Bethel. 


8o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

had  seduced  Dinah)  ^  was  met  by  the  sons  of  Jacob  with  the  demand 
that  the  Shechemites  should  first  be  circumcised ;  but  on  their  consenting, 
before  they  had  recovered  from  the  operation,  they  were  all  attacked  and 
slain  by  Simeon  and  Levi,  and  their  city  spoiled.  Jacob,  in  consequence, 
removed  from  Shechem  in  fear  and  went  to  Bethel,  where  he  again  received 
a  renewal  of  the  Divine  promises,  having  previously  put  away  the  strange 
gods  {ieraphim)  brought  from  Aram.  On  his  leaving  Bethel,  Rachel  died 
in  giving  birth  to  her  second  son,  whom  his  mother  wished  to  call  Benoni,' 
but  whom  his  father  named  Benjamin."  Jacob  then  settled  in  the  south  of 
Judah,  at  Hebron  ;  and  whilst  there,  two  of  his  sons  committed  incest, 
Reuben  with  Bilhah,  and  Judah  (unwittingly)  with  his  own  daughter-in-law 
Tamar,  who  bore  him  twins  named  Perez  and  Zerah. 

The  remainder  of  Jacob's  life  is  intertwined  with  that  of  his  son  Joseph. 
(4)  Joseph  was  his  father's  favourite ;  and  partly  in  consequence  of  this,  and 
partly  in  consequence  of  certain  dreams  which  he  had,  portending  future 
greatness,  he  was  hated  by  his  brethren.  When  he  was  sent  by  his  father 
to  Shechem  and  Dothan  to  inquire  after  their  welfare,  they  took  the  oppor- 
tunity to  plot  against  him,  intending  at  first  to  kill  him  ;  but  a  suggestion 
made  by  one  of  their  number  saved  them  from  actual  blood-guiltiness. 
According  to  one  account,  Reuben^  to  save  his  brother's  life,  proposed  that 
they  should  cast  him  into  a  pit,  from  which  he  purposed  to  deliver  him  ;  but 
on  subsequently  going  thither  he  found  himself  anticipated  by  a  party  of 
Midianites,  who  had  drawn  Joseph  out  of  the  pit  and  carried  him  off. 
According  to  a  second  account,  Judah  proposed  to  sell  Joseph  to  a  company  of 
Iskmaelites  who  passed  by,  and  who  purchased  him  for  twenty  pieces  of  silver.* 
The  brothers,  to  conceal  what  they  had  done,  dipped  in  blood  a  certain 
garment,^  which  Joseph  had  received  from  his  father  as  a  mark  of  honour, 
and  bringing  it  to  Jacob,  led  him  to  believe  that  his  favourite  son  was  torn  in 
pieces  by  a  wild  beast.  Joseph,  carried  into  Egypt,  was  there  sold  as  a  slave 
to  an  Egyptian,  identified  in  one  account  with  Potiphar,  an  officer  of  the 
Pharaoh's,  with  whom  he  enjoyed  great  favour,  until,  refusing  the  advances 
of  his  master's  wife,  he  was  charged  by  her  with  attempting  her  honour,  and 
was  consequently  flung  into  prison.  There  his  skill  in  interpreting  the 
dreams  of  two  fellow-prisoners  brought  him  to  the  notice  of  the  Pharaoh,  who 
also  had  a  dream  of  which  he  desired  to  know  the  significance.  Joseph 
explained  it  as  portending  the  approach  of  seven  years  of  plenty,  followed 
by  seven  years  of  famine,  and  urged  the  king  to  prepare  accordingly. 
Pharaoh,  impressed  by  the  wisdom  he  displayed,  then  made  him  governor 
over  the  land  of  Egypt  ;  and  changing  his  name  to  Zaphenath-paneah,  gave 
him  in  marriage  Asenath,  the  daughter  of  Potiphera,  priest  of  On  [Heliopolis)^ 
who  bare  him  two  sons,  Manasseh  and  Ephraim.     Joseph's  measures  for 

1  Gen.  xxxiv.  seems  to  be  composite,  some  verses  exhibiting  the  phraseol(^y 
of  P  ;  but  the  analysis  of  the  constituent  elements  is  precarious. 
'  i.e.  "son  of  my  sorrow." 

*  i.e.  "son  of  the  right  hand,"  the  right  hand  being  the  lucky  side. 

*  In  Gen.  xxxvii.  28  as  it  stands,  Joseph's  brethren  appear  as  the  persons 
who  drew  him  firom  the  pit,  but  that  the  Midianites  are  really  meant  is 
suggested  by  the  statement  in  xl.  15,  that  he  was  stolen  away  or  kidnapped, 
which  otherwise  has  no  justification. 

"  At  a  later  time  a  similar  garment  was  worn  by  the  princess  Tamar  (see 
2  Sam.  xiii.  18),  which  Josephus  describes  as  xf'pt^'^T^s  ^XPi-  t^^  acpvpuv 
{Aut.  vii.  8,  i).     The  garment  in  ordinary  use  was  short  and  sleeveless. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  8i 

storing  the  corn  produced  during  the  seven  years  of  plenty  were  so  success- 
ful that,  when  the  years  of  famine  came,  Egypt  was  the  only  land  where 
food  was  to  be  had,  and  Joseph's  brethren  came  thither  from  Canaan  ^  to 
buy  it.  Joseph  pretended  not  to  know  them,  and  charged  them  with  being 
spies,  retaining  one  of  them,  Simeon,  as  a  hostage  before  giving  them  corn, 
and  refusing  to  supply  them  further  unless  they  brought  with  them  their 
youngest  brother,  of  whom  they  had  made  mention ;  but  on  their  departure 
he  secretly  restored  their  money.     When  they  returned  to  buy  corn  again, 

*they  brought  Benjamin  with  them  (in  spite  of  Jacob's  unwillingness  to  part 
with  him).  After  being  feasted,  they  left,  but  on  their  homeward  journey 
they  were  overtaken  by  Joseph's  steward  who  accused  them  of  stealing  a 
silver  divining-cup  ^  (which  by  Joseph's  orders  had  been  placed  in  Benjamin's 
sack).  They  were  accordingly  all  brought  back,  and  Judah  magnanimously 
offered  to  remain  as  bondsman  instead  of  Benjamin ;  but  Joseph,  overcome 
by  his  appeal,  discovered  himself  to  them,  and  then  sent  them  away  with 
directions  to  bring  their  father  into  Egypt,  where  he  promised  to  establish 
them.  This  they  did ;  and  Jacob  and  his  sons  were  allowed  by  Pharaoh  to 
settle  in  the  land  of  Goshen^  where  there  was  pasturage  for  their  flocks. 
Before  his  death  Jacob  blessed  the  two  sons  of  Joseph,  reckoning  them  as 
his  own  children,  giving  Ephraim  precedence  over  Manasseh,  and  bestowing 
upon  Joseph's  posterity  a  special  gift  of  territory  in  Canaan ;  and  he  likewise 
predicted  the  future  destinies  of  each  of  his  twelve  sons.*  He  charged  that 
his  body  should  be  buried  at  Machpelah ;  and  died  when  he  was  147 
years  old. 

Joseph  carried  out  his  father's  last  charge,  and  allayed  the  fears  which  his 
brethren  entertained  that  he  would  avenge  himself  upon  them.  By  his 
arrangements  during  the  famine,  all  the  land  of  the  Egyptians  (with  the 
exception  of  that  belonging  to  the  priests,  who  were  supported  by  the  king) 
became  crown  property,  being  surrendered  in  exchange  for  food.  It  was  then 
restored  to  the  cultivate) is  on  the  payment  of  a  rental  of  one  fifth  of  the 
produce.     Before  his  death,  Joseph,  asserting  his  belief  that  the  Hebrews 

•  would  finally  return  to  Canaan  in  accordance  with  the  Divine  promises,  re- 
quired that  his  bones  should  be  taken  with  them.    His  age  at  death  was  1 10. 

In  contrast  to  the  dry  list  of  names  which  occupies  Ggn.  x.,  xi.,  the  life- 
like character  of  the  narratives  contained  in  c.  xii.  foil,  suggests  that  in  such 
the  history  recorded  is  that  of  real  individuals.  But  these  later  chapters  can- 
not be  separated  from  those  that  immediately  precede  by  a  hard  and  fast  line. 
In  these  what  appear  to  be  personal  names  are  blended  with  appellations 

*  In  Egypt  the  famine  would  be  due  to  a  deficient  rise  of  the  Nile,  but  in 
Canaan  to  want  of  rain. 

*  The  cup  when  used  in  divination  was  presumably  filled  with  water. 
Instances  of  such  hydromancy  are  adduced  both  from  classical  and  savage 
sources.  Pausanias  (vii.  21)  relates  that  at  Patrge  there  was  a  spring  which 
was  used  for  divining  in  cases  of  sickness,  a  mirror  being  let  down  as  far  as 
the  surface,  which,  after  prayer  had  been  made  to  Demeter,  showed  to  the 
observers  the  sick  person  either  living  or  dead;  and  Mr.  Frazer  relates  that 
Damascius  mentions  the  case  of  a  "sacred  woman"  who  divined  by  means  of 
pure  water  in  a  crystal  goblet,  professing  to  see  the  future  reflected  in  it. 
Similarly  amongst  the  Iroquois  "if  a  crystal  is  placed  in  a  gourd  of  water,  it 
will  render  visible  the  apparition  of  a  person  who  has  bewitched  another," 
Lang,  Making  of  Rdigion,  p.  91. 

'  See  above,  p.  75.  *  See  p.  97. 


82  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

which  are  obviously  as  local  or  collective  as  any  in  c.  x.  and  xi.^  Thus 
Abraham,  Hagar,  and  Keturah  seem  to  be  individuals ;  but  the  names  of 
their  children  Ishmael,  Midian,  Medan,  etc.,  are  those  of  tribes,''  which  are 
actually  represented  as  engaged  in  traffic  in  the  lifetime  of  Abraham's  grand- 
son Jacob  {Gen.  xxxvii.  25,  28,  36).  Similarly,  the  figures  of  Lot  and 
Rebekah  appear  to  be  those  of  real  personages  ;  but  the  names  of  the  former's 
sons  (Moab  and  Ben-Ammi)  and  the  latter's  uncles  (Uz,  Buz,  etc.)  are  again 
those  of  tribes.  And  this  intermixture  of  personal  with  tribal  appellations  is 
not  explicable  by  the  supposition  that  the  several  tribes  in  question  were 
really  the  descendants  of  an  individual  ancestor.^  The  origin  of  tribes  and 
nations  cannot  with  any  probability  be  traced  solely  to  the  normal  increase 
of  a  single  family.  There  are,  too,  some  features  in  the  accounts  of  the 
different  patriarchs  which  are  unnatural :  such  are  the  repetition  of  the 
number  12  in  connection  with  the  families  of  Nahor  (xxii.  20-24),  Ishmael 
(xxv.  13  foil.)  and  Jacob;  and  the  longevity  ascribed  to  Abraham,  Isaac, 
Jacob,  and  Joseph,  which  is  intermediate  between  the  length  of  life  attributed 
to  the  patriarchs  of  the  pre-historic  age  and  that  represented  as  prevailing  in 
more  historic  times  (see  Deut.  xxxiv.  7,  Josh.  xxiv.  29).  There  are  other 
features  which  seem  to  reflect  certain  circumstances  of  later  history :  for 
instance,  Isaac's  Blessing  of  Esau  {Gen.  xxvii,  39-40)  describes  with  some 
accuracy  both  the  condition  of  Edom  and  its  successive  fortunes  in  the  time 
of  the  Israelite  kingdom,  culminating  in  the  recovery  of  its  independence  in 
the  reign  of  Jehoram  of  Judah  (see  i  Sam.  xiv.  47,  2  Sam.  viii.  14,  2  Kg. 
viii.  22),  and  so  is  probably  to  be  assigned  to  the  9th  century ;  whilst  Jacob's 
Blessing  of  his  sons  {Gen.  xlix.),  from  its  acquaintance  with  the  territory  and 
condition  of  the  several  tribes  in  Canaan  (see  especially  ver.  13)  must  have 
been  composed  after  the  occupation  of  that  country,  and  from  its  attributing 
to  Judah  the  possession  of  sovereignty  (see  ver.  10)  is  probably  in  part  at 
least  to  be  dated  from  the  time  of  David.  Other  statements,  again,  are 
inconsistent  with  the  historic  situation :  for  example,  both  Abraham  and 
Isaac  are  recorded  to  have  come  in  contact  with  the  Philistines  at  Gerar, 
whereas  the  Philistine  immigration  into  Canaan  took  place  only  a  short  time 
before  that  of  Israel  under  Joshua.*  It  is  therefore  difficult  to  regard  the 
patriarchal  records,  taken  as  a  whole,  as  completely  trustworthy.  Neverthe- 
less, many  of  the  figures  in  them  are  probably  real  characters :  in  particular, 
it  is  difficult  to  explain  away  Abraham  and  Isaac,  in  addition  to  Jacob 
(Israel),  as  eponymous  ancestors  of  the  Israelite  people.  The  account 
presumably  rests  upon  traditions  relating  to  historical  personages,  which, 
originally  fluctuating,**  have  been  systematised  and  in  some  measure  coloured 
in  accordance  with  later  ideas  and  fancies.     One,  at  least,  of  the  incidents 

^  In  I  Ch.  ii.  42-55  individuals  (such  as  Caleb)  are  described  as  the  fathers 
of  cities  and  localities. 

'  Greek  history  furnishes  parallels  in  Hellen,  iEolus,  Dorus,  etc. 

'  That  actual  descent  was  not  always  connoted  by  the  term  father  appears 
from  Gen.  iv.  20,  21,  where  members  of  a  craft  or  profession  are  referred  to  a 
common  ancestor. 

4  Cf.  p.  169. 

^  The  strong  resemblance  between  certain  incidents  which  are  related  both 
of  Abraham,  at  different  times  of  his  life,  and  also  of  his  son  Isaac  (compare 
Gen.  xii.  10-20  with  xx.  1-18  and  xxvi.  6-1 1,  xvi.  4-14  with  xxi.  8-21, 
xxi.  22-34  with  xxvi.  26-33)  suggests  that  the  parallel  accounts  are  severally 
duplicate  versions  of  a  single  tradition. 


THE   PATRIARCHAL   HISTORY  83 

related  fits  in  with  what  is  known  from  other  sources.  Of  the  four  kings  who 
attacked  Sodom  in  the  time  of  Abraham,  the  names  of  two  (Amraphel, 
Arioch),  if  not  of  the  others  (Tidal,  Chedorlaomer),  occur  in  the  Assyrian 
inscriptions,  and  the  king  of  Elam's  precedence  over  the  king  of  Shinar 
(Babylonia)  and  his  alleged  authority  over  Sodom  and  its  sister  cities  agree 
with  the  supremacy  which  Elam  appears  to  have  exercised  over  Babylon  and 
Palestine  about  2300  B.C.  ;  so  that  the  narrative  in  Gen.  xiv.  is  consistent 
with  the  conditions  of  the  period,  although  the  monuments  furnish  no  actual 
corroboration  of  the  occurrences  related.^  But  if  Abraham  was  really  a 
contemporary  of  a  king  of  this  date,  the  period  which  the  patriarchal  history 
is  made  to  cover  is  much  in  excess  of  the  three  or  four  generations  to  which 
it  is  ostensibly  confined.  According  to  Ex.  xii.  40  (cf.  Gen.  xv.  13),  the 
sojourn  of  Israel  in  Egypt  lasted  430  years.  If  this  can  be  trusted,  and  the 
date  of  the  Exodus  be  fixed  at  about  1250  B.C.,  the  entry  into  Egypt  must 
have  taken  place  shortly  after  1700  B.C.,  so  that  the  interval  between 
Abraham's  campaign  and  this  event  amounts  to  more  than  6cx)  years. '^ 

^  To  which  of  the  constituent  sources  of  the  Hexateuch  Gen.  xiv.  should 
be  assigned  is  questionable. 

'  On  the  other  hand,  some  authorities  {e.g.  Hommel)  place  the  Babylonian 
king  (Khammurabi),  who  is  identified  with  the  Amraphel  of  Gen.  xiv.  i, 
about  1900  B.C.,  or  even  1750  B.C.,  so  that  the  interval  between  Abraham 
and  the  entry  into  Egypt  is  greatly  reduced. 


CHAPTER  III 

RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE 

A  MONO  the  Semitic  peoples  with  which  the  Hebrews  were 
J~\_  connected,  religion  appears  to  have  originated  in  nature 
worship.  It  was  primarily  a  deification  of  the  powers,  produc- 
tive and  destructive,  of  the  physical  world.  The  universe  was 
believed  to  be  pervaded  by  a  number  of  divine  beings  whose 
potency  was  manifested  in  everything  notable  in  nature  or  human 
fortune.  In  particular,  the  elements  (the  earth,  sky,  and  sea),  the 
storm-clouds,  and  the  heavenly  bodies  (the  sun  and  moon),  were 
regarded  as  controlled  by  powerful  spirits.  To  their  bounty  were 
ascribed  the  fruits  of  the  soil,  and  the  increase  of  the  family; 
and  their  anger  was  displayed  in  disease,  disaster,  and  death. 

The  deep  impression  made  upon  the  Semitic  mind  by  the 
power  of  these  supernatural  beings  was  reflected  in  the  names 
employed  to  designate  godhead.  These  conveyed  such  ideas  as 
those  of  strength  (E/,  IT),^  lordship  (Adon),  possession  {Baal), 
rule  {Melech,  Mokch),  or  the  awe  which  such  attributes  produce 
{Elohim).  The  Semitic  religions,  however,  were  not  prevailingly 
inspired  by  fear.  On  the  contrary,  the  gods  were  looked  upon  as 
friendly  powers,  and  were  even  held  to  be  akin  to  their  wor- 
shippers. Of  them  their  people  considered  themselves  to  be 
sons  and  daughters  (cf.  Num.  xxi.  29,  Jer.  ii.  27) — ultimately, 
no  doubt,  in  a  figurative  or  ethical  sense,  but  perhaps  originally 
in  a  physical  one  (cf.  Gen.  vi.  4).2     Such  close  and  kindly  rela- 

1  There  are,  however,  said  to  be  phonetic  difl&culties  in  the  way  of  deriving 
Elkom  the  root  meaning  "to  be  strong." 

»  So  the  Trojans  traced  their  descent  through  Dardanus  to  Zeus  (Horn.  //. 
XX.  215) ;  and  the  Romans,  through  the  Trojan  ^Eneas,  attributed  their  origin 
to  the  same  divine  source  (Verg.  A.  vii.  220-1). 

S4 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE     85 

tions  between  the  peoples  and  their  deities  were  reflected  in 
such  personal  names  as  El-hanan  (God  is  merciful)  and  Baal- 
hanan.  Similarly  the  term  Melech  (king)  doubtless  designated 
the  god  in  his  capacity  as  the  director  of  his  people  in  war,  and 
the  source  (through  his  ministers)  of  law  and  judgment.  Besides 
the  general  titles  just  explained,  the  gods  who  presided  over  the 
various  provinces  of  nature  received  individual  appellations,  the 
occurrence  of  the  same  divine  names  amongst  the  Babylonians, 
Assyrians,  Canaanites,  and  Arameans  confirming  the  common 
ancestry  of  these  nations.  Such  (to  enumerate  those  of  the 
Babylonians)  were  Ami}  the  god  of  the  sky  (of  which  the 
Assyrian  Asshur  is  said  to  be  originally  a  variation),  Ea^  the  god 
of  the  waters,  Shamash  (Canaanite  S/iemesh),  the  god  of  the  sun, 
Sin  (or  Nantiar),  the  god  of  the  moon,  Ra77unan  (Aramean 
Rimmon),'^  the  god  of  the  storm,  Bel,^  (presumably  the  same  as 
Baal^  but  used  as  a  proper  name),  the  god  of  the  earth  and 
mankind,  Nergal,^  Merodach^  Nebo,^  Ninib^  AdarJ  In  addi- 
tion to  these  male  deities  there  were  several  female,  such  as  Anat 
(Canaanite  Anath),  the  wife  of  Anu,  Damkina,  the  wife  of  Ea, 
Ai^  the  wife  of  Shamash,  Biiit  (perhaps  the  Mylitta  of  Herod, 
i.  131),  and  Ishtar  (Can.  Ashtoreth).^  This  distinction  of  sex 
was  found  in  connection  with  the  titles  of  Baal  and  Melech^ 
to  which  the  feminine  Baalah  and  Malcah  corresponded.  But 
more  commonly  the  proper  names  Ishtar  (Ashtoreth)  and  Anath 
were  employed  as  generic  terms;  whence  arose  the  plural  Ash- 
taroth  and  Anathoth  (the  latter  a  place-name).  Among  the 
Babylonians  a  considerable  mythology  existed  in  connection 
with  some  of  the  gods  mentioned.  Ea  was  believed  to  be  the 
son,   and   Merodach,  Nergal  and   Ishtar  the  grandchildren,  of 

^  Probably  intended  by  the  Anamvielech  of  2  Kg.  xvii.  31. 

»  Cf.  2  Kg.  V.  18.  3  Cf./^r.  1.  2,  2  Is.  xlvi.  I. 

*  Cf.  2  Kg.  xvii.  30.  »  (Zi.Jcr.  1.  2.  «  Cf.  2  Is.  xlvi.  i. 

''  Probably  referred  to  under  the  title  Adraj?tmelech  (2  Kg.  xvii.  31).  Other 
ancient  gods  mentioned  in  the  Babylonian  Creation-story  were  Lakhmu  and 
Lakkamu,  with  one  of  whom  the  name  of  Bethlehe?7i  has  been  supposed  to  be 
connected. 

^  The  LXX.  represents  Ashtoreth  by  KardprTj,  which  suggests  that  the 
original  was  Ashtart  or  Ashtereih,  but  was  changed  to  Ashtoreth  in  order  that 
the  name  might  contain  the  vowels  of  the  word  bosheth,  "shame,"  which  was 
actually  substituted  for  the  allied  name  Baal  in  the  word  Ishbosheth  (.for 
Eshbaal). 


86  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Bel.^  There  was  also  a  kind  of  hierarchy  among  the  deities, 
Anu,  Bel  and  Ea  constituting  a  primary  triad,  and  Sin,  Shamash, 
and  Ramman  a  secondary  triad. 

But  in  spite  of  the  belief  in  the  existence  of  a  plurality  of 
deities,  there  was  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  several  city- 
states,  into  which  both  Babylonia  and  Canaan  were  at  first 
divided,  for  each  to  pay  special  veneration  to  one  god,  after 
whom  the  city  was  often  named.  Thus  in  Babylonia  Anu  was 
the  god  of  Uruk,  Bel  of  Nippur,  Ea  of  Eridu,  and  Nergal  of 
Cuthah  (cf.  2  Kg.  xvii.  30),  and  similarly  among  the  Canaanite 
cities,  Ir-shemesh  (or  Beth-shemesh)  was  presumably  devoted  to 
the  worship  of  Shemesh,  and  Beth-Anath  to  that  of  Anath. 
There  was  a  Baal  of  Peor,  a  Baal  of  Hermon,  and  a  Baal  of 
Tyre;  and  similarly  there  was  a  Baalah  of  Gebal  and  an  Ash- 
toreth  of  Zidon.  In  consequence  of  this  connection  between 
a  deity  and  a  particular  people  or  locality,^  there  was  in  time  of 
war  a  conflict  of  spiritual  as  well  as  of  human  forces  (cf.  i  Kg, 
XX.  23) ;  and  when  one  nation  conquered  another,  the  gods  of 
the  vanquished  were  humiliated  as  well  as  their  people  (see  2  Is. 
xlvi.  I,  2,  Jer.  xlviii.  7,  xlix.  3,  1.  2).  Perhaps  such  was  the 
origin  of  the  use  of  the  plural  Elohim  to  designate  a  single 
god,  in  whom  the  powers  of  his  rivals  were  merged,  or  upon 
whom  they  attended  as  subordinate  ministers.^  When  in  later 
times  a  number  of  smaller  states  were  fused  into  a  larger  one,  the 
latter  doubtless  paid  honour  to  all  the  gods  worshipped  by  the 
different  communities  that  had  become  united.  But  even  in 
such  a  case  one  deity  occupied  a  position  of  pre-eminence  over 
the  rest,  Asshur,  for  instance,  being  the  supreme  protecting  power 
of  the  empire  of  Assyria;  whilst  Merodach  presided  over  the 
destinies  of  Babylon.     The  chief  god  of  Moab  was  Chemosh  ;*' 

^  Merodach,  however,  was  sometimes  identified  with  Bel. 

*  For  the  connection  popularly  held  to  exist  between  a  god  and  a  people  or 
land  cf.  Ruth  i.  15,  16,  /  Sam.  xxvi.  19,  2  Kg.  xvii.  27.  Israel  was  Jehovah's 
land  {Hos.  ix.  3),  and  in  order  to  worship  Jehovah  on  Israelite  soil  Naaman 
desired  to  carry  into  Syria  two  mules'  burden  of  earth  {2  Kg.  v.  17). 

'  But  see  p.  46,  note. 

*  On  the  Moabite  stone  mention  is  made  of  a  deity  Asktar-Chemosh, 
Ashtar  being  a  mascuUne  form  corresponding  to  the  feminine  Ashtoreth. 
Whether  Ashtar-Chemosh  was  distinct  from  Chemosh  is  uncertain ;  possibly 
the  compound  name  represents  the  fusion  of  two  different  divinities  into  one. 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE     2>7 

that  of  Edom  is  not  certainly  known  (it  may  possibly  have  been 
Edom}  other  deities  were  Hadadzxi^  Kaush'^)  \  whilst  the  people 
of  Ammon  appear  to  have  called  their  national  deity  by  the 
name  of  Milcom^  which  was  perhaps  a  title  Uke  Molech.^  The 
Arameans  of  Damascus  paid  special  honour  to  Hadad,*  though 
Rimmon  is  also  known  to  have  been  worshipped  there  {2  Kg. 
V.  18). 

The  character  of  their  religious  faith  resulted,  among  the 
leading  Semitic  peoples,  in  corresponding  institutions  and  rites 
of  worship.  The  veneration  of  the  moon-god,^  for  instance, 
led  not  only  to  the  beginning  of  the  lunar  month  being 
religiously  observed,  but  the  establishment  of  a  sabbath  every 
seven  days,  whilst  the  eventual  identification  of  several  of  the 
other  deities,  just  named,  with  the  planets  (as  of  Merodach  with 
Jupiter,  Nergal  with  Mars  and  Ishtar  with  Venus)  issued  in  the 
adoration  of  "  the  host  of  heaven."  The  attribution  of  the 
products  of  the  soil  to  the  bounty  of  the  gods  had  its  natural 
consequence  in  the  holding  of  festivals  at  the  time  of  the 
vintage  ^  and  harvest,  at  which  offerings  were  made  of  the  first- 
fruits  of  the  vineyard  and  cornfield,  together  with  the  firstlings 
of  the  flock  and  the  herd.  Fountains  of  water  and  groves  of 
trees,''  as  being  endowed  with  growth  or  motion,^  and  affording 
grateful  refreshment  in  a  parched  country  like  Canaan  (cf.  Hos. 
iv.  13)  were  regarded  with  great  veneration,  and  invested  with 
peculiar  sanctity.  Both  alike,  together  (probably)  with  the 
animals  that  frequented  them,  were,  at  an  early  stage  of  thought, 

^  This  is  suggested  by  the  personal  name  Obed-edom  (the  servant  of  Edom); 
cf.  Obadiah  (the  servant  of  Jah). 

'  This  name  occurs  in  the  appellation  of  the  Edomite  king  Kausk-melech 
(cf.  Chemosh-meieck,  Malchiah). 

^  \xijud.  xi.  12-28  it  is  implied  that  Chemosh  was  the  god  of  Ammon  as 
well  as  of  Moab,  but  see  p.  207. 

*  It  appears  in  the  personal  name  Hadadezer  (cf.  Eliezer).  The  compound 
name  Hadad-rimmon  also  occurs  {Zech.  xii.  ii). 

*  The  Canaanite  Ashtoreth  was  a  moon-goddess  (cf.  the  place-name 
Ashteroth-JCaruaifn,  Ashtaroth  of  the  two  horns) ;  but  the  Babylonian  Ishtar 
was  associated  with  the  planet  Venus. 

«  Ci.Jud.  ix.  27. 

'  Cf.  the  association  of  trees  with  deities  in  Greek  and  Roman  religion 
(e.g.  Verg.  G.  iii.  332,  magna  lovis  antiquo  robore  quercus). 
"  By  the  Hebrews,  flowing  water  was  termed  "living  water," 


8S  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

held  to  be  the  embodiment  or  dwelling-place  of  some  animating 
spirit.  Hence  they  were  frequently  the  scene  of  worship  {Deuf. 
xii.  2),  the  seat  of  justice  {En-mishpat^  Gen.  xiv.  7,  cf.  Jud. 
iv.  5),  or  the  abode  of  an  oracle  (the  terebinth  of  Moreh  or  "  the 
teacher,"  Gen.  xii.  6,  Deut.  xi.  30;  ci.  Jud.  ix.  37).  Originally, 
no  doubt,  the  offerings  which  were  intended  to  be  conveyed 
to  the  divinities  inhabiting  such  streams  or  woods  were  deposited 
in  them.  ^  When  a  locality,  not  naturally  distinguished  by  spring 
or  tree,  became  associated,  from  some  reason  or  other,  with 
the  presence  of  a  deity,  it  was  marked  by  a  stone  pillar  or  a 
wooden  pole  {Hos.  iv.  12,  cf.  Gen.  xxviii.  18,  xxxv.  14).  At 
first,  such  pillars  or  poles  (it  would  seem)  were  thought  to  be 
the  abode  of  the  deity  (Beth-el),  and  the  offerings  made  to  the 
indwelling  divinity  were  placed  or  poured  upon  them.  But 
subsequently  an  earthen  or  stone  altar  was  erected  near  them 
to  receive  the  sacrifices,  and  the  pillar  or  pole  became  the 
symbol,  and  perhaps  eventually  an  image,  of  the  god  These 
pillars  and  poles  (the  latter  called  Asherim  or  AsherotJi)  are 
frequently  mentioned  in  connection  with  Canaanite  temples  and 
altars  {Ex.  xxxiv.  13,  Jud.  vi.  25,  2  Kg.  x.  2^^^  27)  i^  and  pillars 
were  at  first  set  up  even  beside  the  altar  of  Israel's  God,  though 
the  practice  was  ultimately  forbidden  {Ex.  xxiv.  4,  cf.  2  Kg. 
xiii.  4-6).  Another  common  site  of  worship  was  the  summit 
of  a  hilL  Both  the  Canaanites  and  Moabites  resorted  to  such 
(see,  for  the  first,  Deut.  xii.  2,  Num.  xxxiii.  52,  and  for  the 
second,  Nu7n.  xxii.  41,  Is.  xv.  2,  xvi.  12);^  and  many  of  the 
sanctuaries  of  the  God  of  Israel  were  Hkewise  erected  on  the 
tops  of  mountains  (see  2  Sam.  xv.  30,  32,  i  Kg.  xviii.  19,  30,  and 
cf.  I  Sam.  vii.  i). 

The  devotion  which  the  peoples  showed  to  their  gods  was 
reciprocated  by  the  help  and  guidance  which  the   latter  were 

^  Cf.  Horn.  //.  xxi.  1 3 1-2  (TTora/ids)  y  5?;  br}da,  ToX^as  Upevere  ravpovSf 
Zojous  5'  iy  divrjai  Kadiere  fiu)vvxo.i  tTnrovs. 

2  In  some  passages  in  the  O.T.  the  term  Asherah  seems  used  to  describe 
the  deity  (perhaps  Ashtoreth)  of  whom  it  was  ordinarily  only  the  emblem ; 
stejtid.  iii.  7  ("they  serv'ed  the  Baalim  and  the  Asheroth"),  i  Kg.  xviii.  19 
(prophets  of  the  Asherah),  i  Kg.  xv.  13,  a  Kg.  xxi.  7  (images  of  Asherah), 
xxiii.  4,  7  (vessels  and  hangings  made  for  the  Asherah). 

'  Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  in  his  inscription,  speaks  of  "making  a  high 
place  for  Chemosh." 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE     89 

believed  to  afford  to  their  worshippers  in  all  important  affairs 
of  life.  The  mind  of  the  deity  was  discovered,  and  his  purposes 
communicated,  through  an  extensive  system  of  divination.  This 
took  four  principal  forms.  The  divine  will  might  be  manifested 
through  the  sights  and  sounds  of  physical  nature,  such  as  the 
waving  or  rustling  of  trees  (cf.  2  Sam.  v.  24) ^  and  the  move- 
ments of  clouds  (Jud.  ix.  37  Heb.).  Or  it  might  be  declared 
through  the  condition  of  the  entrails  of  victims  offered  in 
sacrifice  (Ezek.  xxi.  21).  Or  again  appeal  might  be  made  to  the 
fall  of  lots,  with  which  the  Hebrew  Urim  and  Thummim  were 
probably  connected,  and  the  arrows,  and  perhaps  the  teraphim^ 
alluded  to  in  Ezek.  xxi.  21.  Or  finally  the  god  might  impart  his 
counsel  to  his  votaries  directly  instead  of  indirectly.  In  the 
Semitic,  as  in  the  Greek,  religions,  the  deities  were  sometimes 
represented  as  appearing  in  bodily  form,  and  openly  conversing 
with  ordinary 2  men.  But  more  usually  they  disclosed  their 
wishes  or  decisions  secretly  to  certain  chosen  ministers  who 
became  their  spokesmen  or  prophets.  The  communications 
were  made  in  various  ways.  Sometimes  the  prophet  was  a 
dreamer  of  dreams  (cf.  Num.  xii.  6,  2  Sam.  vii.  4,  17);  at  other 
times  he  became  inspired  through  the  influence  of  music  {2  Kg, 
iii.  15)  or  possibly  through  eating  certain  food.^  Information, 
however,  was  not  sought  exclusively  from  the  gods.  The  spirits 
of  the  dead  were  frequently  consulted  {Deut.  xviii.  11,  z  Sam. 
xxviii.  11);  and  for  this  purpose  persons  used  to  lie  among 
the  tombs  {2  Is.  Ixv.  4)  (like  the  Nasamonians  mentioned  by 
Herodotus,  iv.  172).  It  was  probably  the  dead  with  whom 
those  who  had  familiar  spirits  professed  to  hold  intercourse; 
at  least  the  "chirping"  and  "muttering"  spoken  of  by  Is. 
viii.  19  resembles  the  "squeaking"  and  "gibbering"  elsewhere 
attributed  to  ghosts.  *  The  abode  of  the  spirits  of  the  dead  was 
underground,  a  land  of  darkness  and  dust;  and  though  in  it 

^  Cf.  the  oak  of  Dodona,  Horn.  Od.  xiv.  327,  6<ppa  Oeoio  'Ek  8pvbs  vxpiKoixoio 
Albs  jSouXtjj/  iiraKoija-ai. 

'  Cf.   the  story  of  Philemon   and   Baucis,   who  entertained  Jupiter  and 
Mercury  (Ov.  Met.  viii.  631  foil.). 

^  This  was  at  any  rate  the  case  in  Greece :  see  Jevons,  Inirod.  to  Hist. 
Religion^  p.  286,  and  see  below,  p.  145,  note. 

*  Cf.  the  y^/vxT]  Terpiyvla  of  Horn.  //.  xxiii.  lOO-ioi. 


90  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  distinctions  of  rank  and  power  observed  in  the  upper  world 
seem  to  have  been  recognised  (cf.  "Is"  xiv.  9,  Ezek.  xxxii.  27), 
the  state  of  the  dead  generally  resembled  that  of  the  Homeric 
Hades ;  they  were  but  shadows  of  their  former  selves,  nerveless 
and  weak  (cf.  "Is."  xiv.  10).^  It  was  therefore  presumably  only 
from  the  spirits  of  men  who  in  life  were  specially  endowed  with 
powers  of  insight  (like  Tiresias  in  Homer)  that  communications 
were  sought. 

There  is  no  reason  for  thinking  that  the  influence  of  the  Baby- 
lonian and  Canaanite  religions  was  wholly  evil.  The  very  fact 
that  the  deity  worshipped  was  the  deity  of  the  nation  as  a  whole, 
was,  in  itself,  a  social  force,  and  fortified  thj  common  obligations 
of  civil  life  with  a  supernatural  sanction.  Moreover  the  inscrip- 
tions supply  actual  evidence  that  the  gods  worshipped  in  Baby- 
lonia were  believed  to  enforce  such  rules  of  conduct  as  the 
current  standard  of  society  recognised,  and  so  exerted  a  restrain- 
ing influence  upon  individual  licence.^  A  flagrant  wrong  com- 
mitted against  a  fellow-man  was  thought  to  incur  the  anger  of  the 
deities  equally  with  an  infringement  of  their  own  rights.  The 
neglect  of  justice,  the  practice  of  deceit,  the  commission  of 
murder,  theft,  and  adultery  were  accounted  sins  calling  for  Divine 
vengeance.  But  when  these  religions  are  brought  into  com- 
parison with  the  kindred  but  more  progressive  religion  of  the 
Hebrews,  the  elements  of  baseness  and  corruption  in  them  are 
made  apparent.  They  consecrated  beliefs  and  rites  which 
belonged  to  a  primitive  stage  of  human  thought  and  conduct, 
and  in  consequence  eventually  became  obstacles  to  the  intellec- 
tual and  religious  advance  of  the  peoples  amongst  whom  they 
prevailed.  This  was  the  case  in  two  noteworthy  respects.  In 
the  first  place,  the  sacrifice  of  the  first-born  son  in  order  to 
ensure  the  favour  of  the  deity  was  sanctioned  by  religious  usage 
among  the  Canaanites  and  Moabites  up  to  a  late  date  in  their 
history  {Deut.  xii.  31,  2  Kg.  iii.   27).     And  secondly,  the  dis- 

^  The  burial  of  the  body  was  an  honour,  and  the  deprivation  of  it  a 
grievous  loss,  to  the  spirit  of  the  dead;  see  "/j."  xiv.  18-20 :  cf.  Verg.  A. 
xi.  22-23,  ^ocios  inhut?iataque  corpora  terra  Mandamus,  qui  solus  honos 
Acheronte  sub  hno  est ;  Horn.  //.  xvi.  456-457  ^vBa.  e  Tapxv<TovaL  KaaiyvTjToi 
T€  ira.1.  re  Tv/x^io  re  aT-ffkiQ  re'  rb  yb.p  yipas  icrrl  davbvroiv. 

^  See  L.  W.  King,  Babylonian  Religion  and  Mythology ^  pp.  216-220. 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE     91 

tinction  of  sex  which  was  believed  to  exist  among  the  divinities 
of  these  peoples  inevitably  affected  their  worship.  The  sexual 
licence  which  was  practised  in  connection  with  the  rites  of  Bilit 
(Mylitta)  at  Babylon  is  attested  by  Hdt.  i.  199;  and  the  numerous 
censures  of  it  in  the  O.T.  (see  Deut,  xxiii.  17,  marg.,  Hos.  iv.  14) 
imply  that  it  was  likewise  common  among  the  Canaanites. 

From  what  has  been  already  said,  it  will  be  seen  that  certain 
elements  in  the  religions  of  Babylon  and  Canaan  had  their 
parallels  in  that  of  Israel;  and  detailed  consideration  of  the 
latter  will  be  found  to  add  to  their  number.  The  God  of  Israel 
was  frequently  spoken  of  under  the  names  of  Elohim  and  El^ 
the  latter  sometimes  qualified  by  epithets  such  as  Ely  on?-  (Most 
High),  or  Shaddai'^  (Almighty) ;  and  the  titles  Adon,  Adonai  (my 
Lord),  and  (as  the  evidence  of  later  times  indicates)  Baal^^  were 
also  applied  to  Him  as  to  the  gods  of  the  countries  just  men- 
tioned. But  like  the  latter.  He  also  had  a  personal  appellation, 
viz.  Jehovah,  or,  as  it  should  probably  be  written,  Jahveh  or 
Jahaveh.^  This  was  occasionally  abbreviated  to  Jah  (Ex.  xv.  2, 
Ps.  Ixviii.  4),  especially  when,  like  Rimmon,  Chemosh,  and 
others,  it  entered  into  personal  names,  in  which  it  also  appeared 
in  the  form  oi  Jeho  or  Jo  {Tobiah,  Jehoram,  Jonadab,  Azariah ; 
cf.  Tab-rimmorty  Chemosh-nadab,  Hadadezer).  Of  the  circum- 
stances under  which  the  worship  of  Jehovah  was  at  first  adopted 
little  can  be  positively  asserted.  On  the  one  hand,  according 
to  the  Pentateuchal  source  J  {Gen.  xii.  i)  it  was  Jehovah  that  at 
the  first  called  Abraham  forth  from  his  country  (whether  this 
is  assumed  to  be  Ur  or  Haran) ;  and  the  same  authority  repre- 
sents the  Aramean  Laban  as  worshipping  Jehovah  {Gen.  xxiv.  31). 
On   the   other  hand,  it  is   related   by   the   source   E   that   the 

^  See  Gen.  xiv.  22.  The  title  was  also  applied  to  the  deity  worshipped  at 
Salem  (Urusalim  or  Jerusalem),  see  ver.  i8. 

'^  The  title  El-Shaddai  {Gen.  xvii.  i)  or  Shaddai  (xlix.  25)  seems  to  be 
derived  from  a  root  meaning  "to  destroy"  (cf.  Joel  i.  15),  so  that  the  name 
presumably  at  first  described  the  Divine  power  as  displayed  in  destruction. 
Some  authorities  derive  it  from  a  root  meaning  to  "pour  down,"  as  though  it 
meant  the  rain-giver.  '  See  Hos.  ii.  16  and  cf.  p.  279. 

^  It  is  transliterated  in  Clement  of  Alexandria  by  laov^  and  in  Theodoret 
by  Ia/3^,  see  Smith,  Diet.  Bib.  vol.  i.  953.  It  was  probably  pronounced  as 
Yakwek  or  Yahdmeh. 


92  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

ancestors  of  Israel  when  they  lived  on  the  east  of  the  Euphrates, 
worshipped  other  gods  than  Jehovah  f^Josh.  xxiv.  2),  and  it  is  in 
accordance  with  this  that  Jacob,  when  returning  from  Aram, 
is  described  as  bringing  strange  gods  with  him  {Gen.  xxxv.  2, 
cf.  xxxi.  19),  whilst  the  same  source  avoids  using  the  name 
Jehovah  until  the  passage  recording  how  God  made  Himself 
known  by  it  to  Moses  {Ex.  iii.  13-14).  The  Priestly  code,  again, 
expressly  states  that  God  was  known  to  the  Patriarchs  under  the 
title  of  El-Shaddai  only,  the  name  Jehovah  being  first  revealed 
to  Moses  {Ex.  vi.  3).  The  appellation  Jeliovah^  however,  under 
the  form  Jo  seems  to  occur  before  Moses'  time  in  the  name 
of  his  mother  Jochebed ;  and  it  is  scarcely  Hkely  that  Moses,  in 
conveying  the  Divine  message  to  his  countrymen,  should  have 
used,  to  designate  its  Author,  a  title  altogether  unfamiliar.  On 
the  whole,  it  seems  probable  that  Jehovah  is  a  name  of  pre- 
Mosaic  date,  but  that  it  became  current  among  the  ancestors 
of  the  Hebrews  in  the  desert  country  of  Southern  Palestine 
or  Northern  Arabia  rather  than  in  Babylonia.  It  was,  at  any 
rate,  when  Moses  was  staying  amongst  a  body  of  Arabian 
nomads,  called  variously  Midianites  or  Kenites,^  that  he  received 
the  revelation  which  renewed  in  Israel  its  well-nigh  abandoned 
faith  {Josh.  xxiv.  14).^ 

The  rites  practised  in  connection  with  the  religion  of  Jehovah 
during  the  Patriarchal  period  had  much  in  common  with  those 
observed  in  honour  of  other  deities,  and  were  such  as  might 
be  expected  to  prevail  among  a  nomadic  tribe.  Worship  was 
offered  at  trees  {Gen.  xxi.  33),  or  large  stones  set  upright 
as  pillars.  These  last,  as  has  been  said,  were  probably  at  first 
thought  of  as  the  abodes  of  the  deity,  and  severally  called  the 
"house  of  God"  {Bethel^  Gen.  xxviii.  22);  and  upon  them 
offerings  of  blood,  oil,  or  fat  {Gen.  xxviii.   18,  xxxv.  14)  were 

^  See  Ex,  iii.  i,  Jtid.  i.  16.  It  is  noteworthy  that  the  Rechabites,  who 
were  a  Kenite  family  (/  Ch.  ii.  55),  were  zealous  adherents  of  Jehovah  at  a 
time  when  Israel,  under  the  influence  of  Jezebel,  was  attracted  to  Baal 
worship  (^  Kg.  x.  15-16). 

"^  For  the  meaning  of  the  name  Jehovah  see  p.  104.  The  word  occurs  in 
later  history  as  an  element  of  the  names  of  certain  non- Israelites,  viz.  Uriah 
the  Hittite  {a  Sam.  xi.  3),  Tobiah  the  Ammonite  {Neh.  ii.  19),  Joratn  of 
Hamath  {2  Sam.  viii.  10),  and  probably  Jahubidi,  also  of  Hamath  (men- 
tioned in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions) :  these  are  perhaps  instances  of  borrowing. 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE    93 

pourevl  or  smeared  in  order  to  be  conveyed  to  the  indwelling 
power;  hut  as  the  conception  of  God  was  increasingly  spiritualised, 
they  became  simple  altars  upon  which  sacrifices  were  made  by 
fire,  in  whose  savour  the  Deity  took  pleasure  (of.  Gen.  viii.  21). 
Such  sacrifices  were  accompanied  by  meals  or  feasts  {Gen.  xxxi. 
54),  in  which  the  offerers  participated.  As  was  natural  amongst 
a  pastoral  race  the  offerings  were  taken  from  the  herd  or  the  flock. 
A  distinction  between  clean  and  unclean  animals^  for  sacrificial 
purposes  is  represented  in  Genesis  as  dating  from  before  the 
Flood,  and  as  being  observed  subsequently  by  Abraham  (xv.  9, 
where  the  five  animals  named  are  all  "clean ").2  On  one  occasion 
Abraham  purposed  to  offer  up  his  son  Isaac  as  a  sacrifice  to 
Jehovah  {Gen.  c.  xxii.).  Jehovah  was  regarded  as  the  giver  of 
offspring  {Gen.  xxx.  2,  6,  xx.  17,  18,  etc.);  and  the  claim  of  the 
Deity  to  what  He  bestowed  was  (it  would  appear)  occasionally 
acknowledged  among  the  early  Israelites,  as  amongst  their  neigh- 
bours, in  this  exceptional  way.  Circumcision  prevailed  in  Israel 
as  it  did  amongst  the  Egyptian  priests  (Hdt.  ii.  104).  The  origin 
and  significance  of  this  rite  is  obsture ;  but  among  the  Arabians 
it  was  practised  at  the  time  of  marriage  (cf.  Ex.  iv.  24-26),  and 
was  perhaps  in  part  due  to  physical  considerations,  and  in  part 
invested  with  a  sacrificial  character.  It  is  represented,  however, 
as  being  imposed  by  Abraham  upon  his  son  Isaac  when  the  latter 
was  only  eight  days  old,  and  is  altogether  regarded  as  a  religious 
ordinance,  the  person  upon  whom  it  was  performed  being 
consecrated  to  Jehovah  {Gen.  xvii.  12,  P).  When  the  Israelites 
were  subsequently  settled  in  Egypt  they  seem  to  have  neglected 
the  practice,  and  thereby  exposed  themselves  to  the  reproach 
of  the  Egyptians  {Josh.  v.  2-9).  Nothing  is  related  of  the 
observance,  by  the  patriarchs,  of  the  Sabbath ;  but  the  week 
as  a  division  of  time  occurs  in  the  story  of  the  Flood  {Gen.  vii.  4, 
viii.  10,  12),  and  appears  more  than  once  in  the  history  of  Jacob 

^  The  origin  of  the  distinction  was  perhaps  due  to  totemism,  i.e.  the  belief 
that  certain  kinds  of  animals  were  the  ancestors  of  certain  tribes,  who,  in 
consequence,  held  them  too  sacred  for  ordinary  food,  and  might  only  eat 
them  religiously  for  the  purpose  of  entering  into  communion  with  the  animal 
ancestor  (cf.  2  Is.  Ixv.  4-5,  Ixvi.  17,  where  the  eating  of  swine's  flesh  and  the 
mouse,  both  unclean  animals,  is  connected  with  religious  rites). 

^  See  Lev.  c.  xi. 


94  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

{Gen.  xxix.  27,  etc.).  The  patriarchs  themselves  acted  as  priests, 
the  existence  of  a  sacerdotal  order  being  apparently  a  develop- 
ment of  later  times.  As  will  be  seen,  even  when  such  had  come 
into  existence,  the  chieftains  of  Israel  for  long  continued  to 
exercise  priestly  functions. 

The  sensuous  conceptions  of  Jehovah  which  were  involved 
in  many  of  the  rites  whereby  men  approached  the  Deity  have 
their  parallels  in  the  accounts  given  of  the  communications  made 
by  the  Deity  to  men.  These  were  often  imparted  through  the 
channels  of  the  senses,  celestial  beings  in  human  shape  visiting 
the  patriarchs,  partaking  of  their  hospitality,  conversing  with  them 
in  tones  audible  to  others,  and  even  meeting  them  in  physical 
encounter  (see  Gen.  xviii.  1-15,  xxxii.  24,  25).  Such  Divine 
visitants  are  generally  described  as  Jehovah's  angels^  but  they 
are  sometimes  identified  with  Jehovah  Himself  {Gen.  xvi.  7,  13, 
xxii.  II,  12).  In  certain  instances  Jehovah  or  His  angel  speaks 
through  the  medium  of  a  dream  (xxviii.  12-15),  ^r  His  presence 
is  manifested  by  a  mysterious  flame  ^  (likewise  seen  in  sleep) 
(Gen.  XV.  17).  On  the  other  hand,  in  the  case  of  many  of  the 
occurrences  ascribed  to  the  immediate  presence  or  act  of  God, 
the  language  employed  only  appears  to  mean  that  they  were 
providential.  For  instance,  Abraham's  hope  that  Jehovah  would 
send  His  angel  with  his  servant  when  despatched  on  a  journey 
could  only  be  a  prayer  that  success  might  attend  him  {Gen.  xxiv. 
40,  42);  and  the  statement  that  it  was  God  who  directed  the 
patriarchs  to  leave  their  homes  {Gen.  xii.  i,  xxxi.  3)  is  doubt- 
less only  meant  to  express  the  belief  that  the  patriarchs  in  their 
movements  were  divinely  guided. 

The  sanctions  of  morality,  so  far  as  can  be  judged,  were  purely 
temporal ;  and  the  rewards  of  virtue  and  the  penalties  of  wicked- 
ness were  confined  to  this  life.  The  prevailing  ideas  respecting 
the  conditions  of  the  soul  after  death  resembled  those  which 
were  current  among  the  Babylonians,  as  described  above.  The 
spirit  of  a  dead  man  was  not  thought  to  come  to  an  end  with  the 
dissolution  of  the  body,  but  passed  to  a  lower  world  called  Sheol^ 
which  is  distinguished  from  the  grave.   Thus  Jacob,  who  believed 

*  Cf.  the  Burning  Bush  at  Sinai  and  the  Pillar  of  Fire  and  Cloud  in  the 
Wilderness. 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE    95 

Joseph  to  be  torn  in  pieces,  is  represented  as  saying  that  he 
would  go  down  to  Sheol^  to  his  son,  mourning  {Gen.  xxxvii.  35). 
There  are  no  indications  of  a  belief  that  in  Sheol  there  was  any 
distinction  of  condition  based  on  moral  worth.  It  seems  to  have 
been  viewed  as  the  general  receptacle  of  all,  without  regard 
to  conduct,  and  not  as  a  place  of  retributive  justice.^ 

But  whilst  the  religion  of  Israel  thus  had  numerous  points 
of  contact  with  the  rehgions  of  the  surrounding  peoples,  it  can 
scarcely  be  doubted  that  it  was  characterised,  even  within  the 
period  covered  by  the  patriarchal  history,  by  a  purer  moral  standard, 
and  a  more  elevated  view  of  the  Divine  nature,  than  prevailed 
in  contemporary  cults.  The  ideas  and  ideals  of  aftertimes  cannot 
have  stood  altogether  out  of  relation  with  those  of  an  earlier  age ; 
and  the  germ  and  potentiality  of  Israel's  mature  beliefs  must 
have  existed  in  the  nation's  infancy.  It  is  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  teachers  to  whom  Israel  owed  so  much  in  historic  times 
had  predecessors,  who  initiated  the  advance  which  their  race 
ultimately  made  beyond  kindred  peoples.  And  though  it  is 
difficult  to  specify  with  precision  or  certainty  the  features  of  moral 
and  religious  superiority  which  the  early  forefathers  of  Israel 
presented  over  their  contemporaries  (since  the  account  given 
of  them  is  open  to  the  suspicion  of  being  idealised),^  yet  the 
record  contains  at  least  one  instance  of  the  actual  passage  from 
a  lower  to  a  higher  morahty.  The  narrative  of  the  sacrifice 
of  Isaac  which  represents  it  as  being  at  first  enjoined  by  Jehovah 

*  It  has  been  thought  by  some  that  the  worship  of  the  dead  prevailed 
among  the  early  Hebrews,  and  that  the  teraphim  {Gen.  xxxi.  19,  cf.  xxxv.  2 
foil.)  were  images  of  deceased  ancestors,  who  were  interested  in  the  fortunes 
of  their  posterity.  The  nature  of  the  teraphim  is  too  obscure  for  the  use  of 
them  to  be  made  the  basis  of  such  an  inference  ;  but  that  worship  was  paid  to 
the  dead  by  the  Canaanites  and  neighbouring  peoples  is  at  least  suggested  by 
the  fact  that  certain  usages  practised  in  the  worship  of  the  gods  were  also 
observed  in  mourning  for  the  departed.  Such  were  the  offering  of  food 
{Deut.  xxvi.  14,  Ps.  cvi.  28),  the  removal  of  the  shoes  {Ezek.  xxiv.  17,  cf. 
Ex.  '\\\.  5,  Josh.  V.  15),  and  self-mutilation  {Deiit.  xiv.  i.  Lev.  xix.  28, 
Jer.  xvi.  6,  cf.  /  Kg.  xviii.  28,  Jer.  xli.  5);  and  the  prohibition  of  certain  of 
these  practices  amongst  the  Israelites  as  signs  of  mourning  witnesses  to  some 
serious  danger  attending  their  adoption.  It  is  noteworthy  that  many  of  the 
burial  places  of  the  Hebrew  patriarchs  were  later  sanctuaries  (Hebron, 
Gen.  XXV.  9,  xlix.  30,  xxiii.  2  foil.,  Shechem, /.Ji'y^.  xxiv.  32);  and  the  X.t.xxr\.god 
{Elohim)  is  applied  to  the  spirit  of  Samuel  in  /  Sam.  xxviii.  13. 

'  See,  for  example,  Gen.  xiv.  19,  22,  xviii.  25,  xxiv.  3. 


96  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  then,  by  His  direction,  not  completed,  witnesses  to  a  con- 
sciousness of  the  nation's  having  passed  through  a  stage  of 
religious  development,  in  the  course  of  which  human  sacrifice 
had  at  first  prevailed,  and  then  been  discontinued  as  a  nobler 
view  of  the  Divine  character  asserted  itself.  The  spirit  of 
religious  devotion,  which  prompted  worshippers  to  offer  to  the 
deity  they  adored  their  dearest  possession,  even  to  the  extent  of 
slaying  an  only,  or  a  firstborn,  son  thus  appears  as  coming  under 
the  control  of  an  enlightened  conscience  at  a  comparatively  early 
date  in  the  people's  history ;  whereas  in  the  case  of  the  Moabites 
a  sacrifice  similar  to  that  of  Abraham  is  recorded  as  late  as 
the  period  of  the  Israelite  kings. 

The  stories  of  the  converse  which  the  Hebrew  patriarchs  are 
related  to  have  had  with  the  Deity  owe  their  interest  and  import- 
ance to  the  fact  that  they  form  part  of  a  history  which  in  its  later 
stages  is  of  a  remarkable  character.  The  earliest  accounts  of 
intercourse  held  with  celestial  visitants  and  of  communications 
received  from  God  through  dreams  and  oracles  are  not,  indeed, 
in  themselves  of  much  value ;  nor  can  a  hard  and  fast  line  be 
drawn  between  them  and  the  similar  stories  which  occur  in  the 
annals  of  other  nations.  But  at  the  same  time  a  progress  is 
observable  in  the  successive  revelations  reputed  to  have  been 
made  to  Israel  which  is  not  to  be  detected  elsewhere ;  and  the 
final  development  attained  by  the  Hebrew  prophetic  oracles  is 
both  worthy  of  the  Divine  origin  ascribed  to  them,  and  gives 
significance  to  their  ambiguous  and  obscure  beginnings.  It  is 
the  nature  of  the  later  revelations  which  is  the  best  warrant  for 
referring  them  to  a  supernatural  source ;  and  the  inferences  drawn 
from  these  necessarily  affect  the  estimate  formed  of  what  is 
recorded  of  an  earlier  period. 

It  is  from  the  same  point  of  view  that  the  import  of  the 
Divine  covenant  affirmed  to  have  been  made  with  the  patriarchs, 
and  the  assurances  which  it  conveyed  of  a  great  future  in  store 
for  their  posterity,  must  be  considered.  The  ultimate  greatness 
of  Israel  existed  potentially  from  the  first ;  and  those  who  held 
the  course  of  the  world  to  be  ordered  by  a  Divine  will  naturally 
and  rightly  believed  that  the  destiny  of  their  race  was  provi- 
dentially directed.     In  this,  indeed,  they  were  not  singular.     The 


RELIGION  IN  THE  PATRIARCHAL  AGE     97 

idea  that  the  fortunes  of  a  nation  were  the  special  care  of  the 

nation's  god  was  shared  by  Israel  with  Moah,  Assyria,  and  other 

peoples ;  and  is  familiar  enough  in  Classical  literature.     But  the 

destiny  of  Israel  did  not  culminate  with  national  aggrandisement, 

though  it  is  probable  that  in  the  promises  recorded  to  have  bten 

made  by  God  to  the  patriarchs  this  is  principally  in  the  mind  of 

the  historian.^     The  development  of  a  doctrine  of  God  which 

the  civilised  world  has  made  its  own,  and  the  gradual  shaping 

of  hopes  which  found  their  fulfilment  in  our  Lord,  give  to  the 

early  beliefs  of  Israel  a  distinction  the  equal  of  which  cannot  be 

claimed  for  those  of  any  other  ancient  people. 

A  specific  reference  to  the  actual  coming  of  our  Lord  has  very  generally 
been  seen  in  Gen.  xlix.  lo :  "  The  sceptre  shall  not  depart  from  Judah,  nor 
the  ruler's  staff  from  between  his  feet  until  Shiloh  come  ;  and  unto  him  shall 
the  obedience  of  the  peoples  be."  In  this  passage  the  word  Shiloh  has  been 
taken  to  be  a  personal  name,  and  to  describe  the  Messiah  as  the  '*  Peace- 
bringer  "  (cf.  Is.  ix.  6).  But  the  name  as  an  appellation  of  the  Messiah  occurs 
nowhere  else  in  the  Bible,  so  that  the  abruptness  of  its  introduction  here 
is  strange ;  and  the  explanation  given  of  it  has  been  questioned  on  philo- 
logical grounds.'^  The  LXX.,  in  place  of  the  third  clause,  reads  ^wj  &v  iXdjj 
TO,  diroKeifieva  air^,  which  points  to  a  different  Hebrew  original  {She //oh  in 
place  of  Shi/oh)  that  admits  of  being  rendered  (i)  "until  there  come  that 
which  is  his"  ;  (2)  "until  there  come  he  whose  it  (the  sceptre)  is"  (cf.  Ezek. 
xxi.  27).  The  passage,  as  has  been  already  said,  probably  dates  from  the 
time  of  David ;  and  if  the  first  of  the  two  alternatives  suggested  by  the  LXX. 
be  adopted,  the  allusion  would  seem  to  be  generally  to  the  acquisition  by 
Judah  of  its  destined  inheritance,  whatever  it  might  be.  But  if  the  second 
alternative  be  correct,  the  reference  is  probably  to  the  hopes  centred  in  David's 
line,  which  were  to  culminate  in  a  sovereign  of  world-wide  authority.  In  the 
latter  case,  the  passage  may  be  regarded  as  really  Messianic,  but  expressing 
anticipations  which  were  fulfilled  by  our  Lord  in  a  sense  which  the  writer 
presumably  did  not  contemplate. 

^  In  Gen.  xxii.  18,  xxvi.  4  the  rendering  should  be  "in  thy  seed  shall  all 
nations  of  the  earth  bless  themselves"  (see  marg.),  and  the  use  of  the 
reflexive  form  here  determines  the  sense  of  xii.  3.  The  general  tenor  of  these 
passages  implies  that  the  prosperity  of  Abraham's  descendants  would  be  such 
that  people  everywhere  would  wish  for  their  friends  nothing  better  than  the 
like  good  fortune :  cf.  Gen.  xlviii,  20  and  contrast  Jer.  xxix.  22. 

"^  By  some  scholars  Shi/oh,  whilst  treated  as  a  proper  noun,  has  been 
regarded  as  a  p/ace-na.me,  and  the  passage  rendered  tintil  he  {Judah)  come  to 
Shiloh,  the  allusion  being  to  the  assembling  of  all  Israel  at  Shiloh  (in 
Mt.  Ephraim)  as  related  m  Josh,  xviii.  i.  But  it  is  highly  improbable  that 
Judah,  separated  as  it  was  from  the  rest  of  Israel  (see  pp.  180,  184),  was 
really  among  the  tribes  that  gathered  at  Shiloh  in  the  time  of  Joshua ;  whilst 
the  proposed  rendering  makes  it  necessary  to  refer  the  previous  expressions 
sceptre  and  ru/er's  staff  (which  are  strongly  suggestive  of  roya/ty)  to  such 
precedence  as  Judah  enjoyed  in  being  the  first  to  invade  western  Canaan 
\Jud.  i.  2),  or  to  its  alleged  priority  in  the  order  of  march  through  the 
wilderness  {Num.  x.  14,  P). 
H 


CHAPTER  IV 
THE  EXODUS   AND  THE  WANDERINGS 

Sources — Exodus ^  Numbers ^  Deuteronomy 

THE  length  of  the  sojourn  of  Israel  in  Egypt  cannot  be 
determined  with  certainty.  It  is  fixed  in  Ex.  xii.  40  at 
430  years,  with  which  Gen.  xv.  13  approximately  agrees.  In 
the  LXX.,  however,  this  period  is  made  to  include  the  time 
spent  by  the  patriarchs  in  Canaan ;  and  if  value  can  be  placed 
upon  the  genealogies  given  in  Ex.  vi.  16-20,  Num.  xxvi.  5-9, 
xxvii.  I,  the  number  of  generations  from  Jacob  to  Moses  and  his 
contemporaries  only  amounted  to  four  or  five^  (cf.  Gen.  xv.  16). 
Nor  can  help  be  obtained  from  Egyptian  sources,  as  the  monu- 
ments furnish  little  or  no  information  respecting  the  Hebrews.^ 
It  is  probable,  as  has  been  already  said,  that  the  migration  into 
Egypt  took  place  during  the  domination  of  the  Asiatic  Hyksos, 
to  whom  the  15th,  i6th  and  17th  dynasties  are  assigned.  During 
their  occupation  of  Lower  Egypt  (which,  according  to  Manetho 
(in  Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  14)  lasted  511  years),  they  were  constantly  at 
war  with  the  native  Egyptian  princes  who  had  established  them- 
selves at  Thebes ;  and  the  latter,  in  the  time  of  Aames  (Amosis), 
about  1600  B.C.,  succeeded  in  expelling  them.  The  accession 
to  power  of  a  native  line  of  rulers  would  naturally  produce  a 
change  in  the  circumstances  of  those  settlers  who  had  been 
attached  to,  or  protected  by,  the  Hyksos;  and  the  alteration  in 
the  attitude  of  the  Egyptians  to  the  Israelites,  described  in  Ex.  i., 

*  The  extraordinary  age  alleged  to  have  been  attained  by  the  individuals 
included  in  some  of  the  genealogies  (see  for  instance  Ex.  vi.  16-20)  need  not 
be  considered. 

'  For  the  only  certain  reference  to  the  Israelites  occurring  on  Egyptian 
monuments  of  this  age  see  p.  121. 

98 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS         99 

may  not  improbably  be  connected  with  this  dynastic  revolution. 
The  Pharaoh  of  "  the  oppression,"  who  is  unnamed,  was  probably 
Rameses  II.  of  the  19th  dynasty.  The  monuments  discovered 
at  Tell  el  Mashkuta,  11  or  12  miles  from  Ismailia,  amongst  the 
ruins  of  the  city  of  Pithom,  one  of  the  two  store-cities  named 
in  Ex.  i.  II,  show  that  it  was  for  that  monarch  that  the  place 
was  built ;  whilst  the  other  city  mentioned  together  with  Pithom 
actually  bears  the  name  of  Raamses.^  It  was  not,  however,  in 
the  reign  of  Rameses  II.,  but  probably  in  that  of  his  successor 
Mernptah  that  Israel  effected  its  escape.  This  is  implied  in 
Ex.  ii.  23,  and  the  only  tradition  outside  the  Bible  which  seems 
to  relate  to  the  departure  of  the  Israelites  assigns  it  to  the  reign 
of  Mernptah.2  The  dates  of  Rameses  II.  and  the  kings  who 
succeeded  him  are  variously  stated  ;^  but  the  Exodus  may  be 
fixed  approximately  at  1250  or  1200  B.C. 

Of  the  condition  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  almost  as  little  is 
known  as  of  the  time  they  spent  there.  Their  numbers  rapidly 
increased;  and  it  is  probable  that  they  came  to  abandon,  to 
some  extent,  their  earlier  nomadic  habits  and  adopted  a  more 
settled  mode  of  Hfe  (cf  Deut.  xi.  10),  to  the  comparative  comfort 
of  which  they  looked  back  with  regret  when  experiencing  the 
privation  of  the  wilderness  {Num.  xi.  5,  xxi.  5).  Nevertheless 
they  did  not  become  merged  and  absorbed  in  the  people  around 
them;  and  it  was  doubtless  their  separateness  from  the  rest  of 
the  nation  which  ultimately  excited  the  fears  of  the  ruling  powers, 
leading  them  to  pursue  a  policy  of  repression.  Several  of  the 
kings  of  the  i8th  dynasty,  notably  Thothmes  I.  and  Thothmes  III., 
had  carried  the  Egyptian  arms  into  Asia,  had  traversed  Palestine, 
and  had  successfully  engaged  in  conflict  with  the  Hittites,  who 
disputed  that  country  with  them ;  but  in  the  subsequent  reign  of 
Amen-hotep  (as  the  Tell-el-Amarna  tablets,  mentioned  in  a 
previous  chapter,  show)  the  Pharaoh's  hold  upon  the  Palestinian 
cities  which  acknowledged  his  overlordship  became  endangered.* 
Rameses  II.  of  the  19th  dynasty  renewed  hostihties  with  the 

*  It  has  been  identified  by  some  with  Zoan.  '  See  p.  I2i. 

'  The  limits  of  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.  are  variously  given  as  1 348-1 281 
(Sayce,  Egypt  of  the  Hebrews^  p.  309)  and  1275-1208  (Driver  in  Authority  and 
Archmlogy,  p.  69).  «  See  p.  168. 


100  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Hittites ;  and  he  may  have  thought  that  in  the  event  of  ill-fortune 
the  presence,  on  the  eastern  frontier,  of  a  people  alien  in  race 
and  sympathies  might  be  a  menace  to  the  security  of  Egypt 
itself,  if  they  were  allowed  to  acquire  strength  (cf.  Ex.  i.  lo). 
Accordingly  the  Egyptians  imposed  upon  them  the  system  of 
the  corvee,  with  the  object  alike  of  utilising  their  bodily  vigour 
and  breaking  their  spirit.  Besides  employing  them  on  field 
labour  {Ex.  i.  14),  they  engaged  them  upon  the  construction 
of  the  store-cities  of  Pithom  and  Raamses  already  alluded  to, 
the  Hebrew  labourers  being  compelled  to  work  by  superin- 
tendents of  their  own  race,  appointed  over  them  by  the  officials 
of  Pharaoh  {Ex.  v.  14).  It  is  possible,  too,  that  an  effort  was 
made  to  prohibit  the  practice  of  the  Hebrew  religion.  The 
animal  worship  prevalent  in  Egypt  must  have  made  the  Egyptians 
look  with  great  dislike  upon  the  ceremonies  of  a  people  into 
whose  religious  rites  animal  sacrifices  largely  entered  (cf.  Ex. 
viii.  26);  and  the  declension  of  the  Israelites  from  their  ancestral 
faith  during  their  stay  in  Egypt  (affirmed  in  Josh.  xxiv.  14, 
Ezek.  XX.  8,  xxiii.  3,  19)  may  have  been  furthered  by  persecution. 
Finally,  an  attempt  was  made  to  reduce  their  numbers  by  organ- 
ised infanticide.  The  task  of  carrying  this  out  was  first  entrusted 
to  those  who  attended  the  Hebrew  women  in  child-bed.  The 
king's  directions,  however,  were  disobeyed^  by  at  least  some  of 
the  midwives  concerned,^  so  that  the  multiplication  of  the  people 
was  not  seriously  checked  {Ex.  i.  20).  Accordingly  more 
effective  steps  were  taken,  and  orders  were  given  that  all  the 
male  children  of  the  Hebrews  should  be  seized  immediately 
after  their  birth,  and  drowned  in  the  Nile,  the  female  children 
alone  being  allowed  to  live  {Ex.  i.  22).^ 

^  The  fact  that  the  historian  mentions  no  more  than  two  midwives  (whom 
he  names  Shiphrah  and  Puah)  is  perhaps  owing  to  his  having  in  view  only 
Moses'  birthplace,  and  not  the  whole  Israelite  settlement. 

"^  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  9,  2)  represents  the  edict  as  being  due  to  the  alarm 
caused  to  the  king  by  the  prediction  of  an  Egyptian  sacred  scribe 
{lepoypa/jLfxaTevs)  that  a  child  would  be  born  of  Israelite  parentage  who  was 
destined  to  be  a  deliverer  to  his  own  people  and  a  danger  to  the  Eg)-ptians. 
Some  scholars  regard  the  direction  to  drown  the  male  children  as  parallel 
to  the  command  given  to  the  midwives,  the  two  being  different  accounts 
(derived  from  J  and  E  respectively)  of  a  single  device  to  reduce  the  Hebrew 
population. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        loi 

From  this  harsh  and  cruel  oppression  no  attempt  at  escape 

was  made  until  there  appeared  amongst  the  oppressed  a  leader 

who  revived  in  them  the  faith  of  their  forefathers.     This  was 

Moses,  the  son  of  Amram,  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,^  and  his  wife 

Jochebed.     The  child  seems  to  have  been  born  soon  after  the 

decree  for  the  destruction  of  the   Hebrew  male  children  had 

been  issued ;  for  nothing  is  said  of  any  device  employed  by  his 

mother  to  save  his  elder  brother  Aaron  similar  to  that  which 

she  was  constrained  to  adopt  to  preserve  her  second  son.     She 

concealed  him  at  home  as  long  as  she  could ;  but  when  at  length 

she  was  compelled  to  commit  him  to  the  river,  she  placed  him 

in  a  Httle  boat  of   papyrus. ^      There,  instead  of   meeting  the 

death  to  which  he  was  consigned,  he  was  found  by  one  of  the 

daughters    of    the    reigning    Pharaoh    (called    Thermuthis    by 

Josephus  {Ant,  ii.  9,  5-7),  and  said  to  have  been  married  but 

childless),  who  pitied  him,  took  him  under  her  protection,  and 

even  procured,  through  the  agency  of  the  child's  sister  (Miriam), 

his  own  mother  to  act  as  nurse.     He  was  reared  in  the  house  of 

the  Egyptian  princess,  and  was  thus  enabled  to  acquire  much  of 

the  learning  for  which  Egypt  was  even  then  famous. 

This  narrative  may  conceivably  be  only  a  popular  explanation  of  the 
name  Moses  (erroneously  taken  to  mean  "drawn  out"  of  the  water).  A 
similar  story  is  related  of  Sargon,  an  early  king  of  Accad  ;  ^  and  the  tales 
connected  with  the  infancy  of  Romulus  and  Cyrus  (the  latter  in  Hdt.  i.  107 
foil.)  are  also  parallel.  But  the  sagacity  which  Moses  possessed,  and  the 
skill  in  thaumaturgy  attributed  to  him,  seem  to  imply  that  he  had  been 
befriended  and  educated  in  some  such  way  as  is  recounted  in  Ex.  ii.  i-io. 

The  name  Moses  [Mosheh),  if  connected  with  the  Heb.  viashah  "to  draw 
out,"  could  only  mean  "drawing  out,"  not  "drawn  out."  Probably  the 
name  is  non- Hebraic ;  and  some  have  seen  in  it  the  second  element  of  words 
like  Thothmes  {Thutmosis),  Aames  {Amosis),  /Jameses,  etc.,  which  is  said  to 
have  the  meaning  of  "son."^ 

When  Moses  was  arrived  at  manhood,  an  incident  occurred 
which  forced  him  to  leave  Egypt  and  flee  uito  the  wilderness  of 
Sinai.  Seeing  one  of  his  countrymen  suffering  ill-usage  at  the 
hands  of  an  Egyptian,  he  slew  the  latter  and  concealed  his  body ; 

^  For  his  ancestry  see  JSx.  vi.  16-20,  Num.  xxvi.  57-59. 

^  Cf.  Is.  xviii.  2. 

^  See  McCurdy,  History,  Prophecy,  and  the  Monnments,  i.  p.  99. 

*  Josephus  {Ant.  ii.  9.  6)  gives  as  the  etymology  of  the  name  the  two 
Egyptian  words  /nw  and  iJo-^s,  meaning  respectively  water  and  saved  from 
water. 


I02  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

but  on  subsequently  intervening  in  a  quarrel  between  two 
Hebrews,  he  found  that  the  homicide  was  known,  and  in  fear " 
of  his  life,  he  retreated  to  the  desert  Under  some  of  the 
earlier  Pharaohs  mines  had  been  opened  and  worked  in  the 
Sinaitic  peninsula;  and  the  western  parts  of  it  were  doubtless 
still  occupied  by  Egyptians.  Presumably  therefore  Moses  with- 
drew to  the  southern  extremity,  where,  on  its  south-eastern^ 
flank,  a  body  of  Midianites  had  established  themselves  under 
a  priest-chieftain  (variously  named  Jethro  {Ex.  iii.  i),  Reuel 
{Ex.  ii.  i8,  2i),  or  Hobab  [Jud.  iv.  ii) ).  With  this  priest  (whose 
seven  daughters  he  aided  when  disturbed  as  they  watered  their 
flocks)  he  took  up  his  abode;  and  marrying  Zipporah,  one  of 
the  seven,  had  by  her  two  sons,  whom  he  named  Gershom  and 
Eliezer  {Ex.  ii.  22,  xviii.  4). 

\njud.  i.  16,  iv.  11  Moses  is  represented  as  marrying  into  a  Kenite  family. 
Of  the  three  names  given  to  the  priest  of  Midian,  Reuel  may  perhaps  be 
regarded  as  a  title  (shepherd  of  God) ;  but  the  discrepancy  between  Jethro 
{/ether  in  Ex.  iv.  18)  and  Hobab  re^iains  unless  the  word  rendered  "father- 
in-law"  in  Ex.  iii.  i  is  translated  "brother-in-law"  in  Jud.  iv.  11,  or  unless 
Zipporah  was  granddaughter  of  Jethro  (Reuel)  and  daughter  of  Hobab 
{ci.  Num.  X.  29,  where  Hobab  is  termed  the  son  of  Reuel). 

It  was  whilst  staying  with  Jethro  and  keeping  his  flock  that 
Moses  formed  the  resolution  of  attempting  the  deliverance  of 
his  countrymen  from  their  oppressors.  He  was  led  to  it  by 
acquiring  among  the  Midianites  or  Kenites,  with  whom  he  dwelt, 
fresh  faith  in  the  Deity  whom  his  fathers  had  worshipped,  and 
who  was  still  adored  by  these  tribes  of  the  desert,^  who,  like 
himself,  traced  their  descent  to  Abraham.  Amid  the  mountain- 
heights  which  occupy  the  central  and  southern  portions  of  the 
Sinaitic  peninsula  there  was  one  peak  which  was  already  regarded 
as  a  sanctuary  {Ex.  iii.  i,  xix.  4),  and  known  by  the  double 
appellation  of   Horeb  or  Sinai  ^  (see  Ex.  iii.   i,  xxiv.   13,   16). 

^  This  is  indicated  by  Ex.  iii.  i,  where  Moses  is  represented  as  leading  the 
flock  of  the  priest  of  Midian  to  the  back  of  the  desert,  i.e.  westward. 

'  That  Jethro  the  priest  of  Midian  was  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah  is 
suggested  by  Ex.  xviii.  10-12. 

^  Sinai  or  Horeb,  if  really  in  the  peninsula,  may  be  identified  with  one 
of  two  peaks,  some  8,000  or  9,000  feet  high,  named  Gebel  Miisa  and 
Serbal,  the  oldest  traditions  favouring  the  latter  (Driver  in  Auth.  and  Arch. ^ 
p.  65),  but  the  incidents  connected  with  the  place  being  best  suited  by  the 
former  (see  p.  113).     In  some  passages,  however,  Sinai  is  brought  into  con- 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        103 

When  Babylonian  control  extended  to  this  region,  the  place 
had  doubtless  been  consecrated  to  the  worship  of  the  god  Sin ; 
but  by  the  Kenites  it  was  regarded  as  hallowed  by  the  presence 
of  their  own  God  Jehovah  (cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  \^,  i  Kg.  xix.  8  foil), 
who  manifested  Himself  in  the  storm-clouds  that  wreathed,  and 
in  the  fire  which  played  about,  the  mountain  summit  (cf.  Dsut. 
xxxiii.  2).  To  it  Moses,  in  the  course  of  his  sojourn  in  the 
desert,  came ;  and  there,  whether  indirectly  through  the  influence 
of  human  counsellors,  aided  by  the  physical  phenomena  and 
sacred  associations  of  the  spot,  or  directly  by  the  immediate 
action  of  the  Divine  Spirit  upon  his  spirit,  he  was  nerved  by  the 
Deity  to  undertake  the  enterprise  of  rescuing  his  countrymen  from 
bondage  and  restoring  them  to  communion  with  the  God  of  their 
fathers  by  solemn  worship  at  the  same  sanctuary  {Ex.  iii.  12). 
It  was  not,  however,  without  hesitation  that  he  entered  upon  his 
task;  for  he  did  not  possess  the  eloquence  best  calculated  to 
persuade  and  animate  an  unbelieving  and  disheartened  people 
\Ex.  iii.  II  foil.  iv.  i  foil.).  But  he  had,  besides  his  faith  in 
Jehovah,  two  reasons  for  confidence.  On  the  one  hand,  he 
could  use  as  his  spokesman  his  elder  brother  Aaron,  a  man 
who  was  endowed  with  the  faculty  which  he  lacked;  and  on 
the  other  hand,  he  possessed  gifts  of  thaumaturgy,  which,  in 
the  eyes  of  both  himself  and  others,  indicated  that  a  Divine 
power  was  working  with  him.  He  accordingly  determined  to 
obey  the  Divine  monitions;  and  finding  that  the  danger  which 
had  driven  him  from  Egypt  no  longer  threatened  him,  he  at  once 
took  leave  of  his  father-in-law,  and  returned,  with  his  wife  and 
sons,  to  his  people.  On  the  way  a  peril  affecting  his  life  was 
attributed  to  the  Divine  resentment  at  his  failure  to  undergo  the 
rite  of  circumcision  (according  to  Arabian  custom)  at  the  time 
of  his  marriage;  and  it  was  only  averted  (as  was  believed)  by 
his  wife  taking  a  flint  ^  and  circumcising,  as  a  substitute,  their 
son  Gershom.     After  this  it  would  appear  that  Zipporah  was  sent 

nection  with  Paran  and  Seir  (Edom)  (see  Deut.  xxxiii.  2,  Jtid.  v.  4-5,  and  cf. 
Hab.  iii.  3).  Of  the  two  names  for  the  mountain,  Horeb  is  generally  regarded 
as  employed  by  E  and  D,  Sinai  by  J  and  P. 

^  For  the  use  of  stone  in  preference  to  metal  cf.  Josh.  v.  2.  Stone  im- 
plements are  often  retained  in  connection  with  religious  rites  after  they  have 
passed  out  of  common  use;  see  Frazer,  Golden  Bough  ^  i.  p.  173. 


104  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

back  to  her  father,  with  whom  she  stayed  until  after  the  Exodus 
(see  Ex.  xviii.  2). 

The  historian  relates  that  at  Horeb  the  angel  of  Jehovah  appeared  unto 
Moses  in  a  flame  of  fire  out  of  the  midst  of  a  bush,  which  it  left  unconsumed,  * 
and  that  when  Moses  turned  aside  to  see  the  sight,  God  called  unto  him 
out  of  the  bush,  bidding  him  put  off  his  shoes,  for  the  place  was  holy, 
and  affirming  Himself  to  be  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  Moses 
hid  his  face  in  fear, '^  and  God  then  revealed  His  purpose  of  delivering  His 
people  and  leading  them  into  Canaan,  and  declared  His  name,  when  Moses 
inquired  it,  to  be  I  am  that  I  am  (or  I  will  be  that  I  will  be),  adding 
"Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  I  am  (or  I  will  be)  hath 
sent  me  unto  you." 

The  narrative  of  the  Burning  Bush  seems  to  falf  into  line  with  others 
which  represent  fire  as  the  symbol  of  the  Deity,  such  as  Ex.  xiii.  21,  xix.  16, 
Ps.  xviii.  8,  12;  cf.  also  Gen.  xv.  17.  The  belief  implied  finds  its  most 
natural  explanation  in  electric  phenomena. 

The  name  I  am  or  (better)  I  will  be,  under  which  God  is  related  to 
have  disclosed  Himself  to  Moses,  is  the  ist  pers.  of  the  imperf.  or  fut. 
tense  of  the  verb  to  be,  the  3rd  pers.  of  which  (in  a  dialectic  form)  is 
disguised  in  Jehovah ;  and  the  expression  is  doubtless  an  abbreviation  of 
the  previous  I  am  (or  will  be)  that  I  am  (or  will  be).  In  this  the  vague- 
ness of  the  predication  is  in  accordance  with  a  common  idiom  employed 
where  fuller  explanation  is  either  unnecessary  or  impossible  (cf.  Ex.  iv.  13, 
xxxiii.  19,  I  Sam.  xxiii.  13  (Heb.),  2  Sam.  xv.  20  (Heb.),  2  Kg.  viii.  i) ;  and 
suggests  the  inexhaustible  character  of  the  Divine  activity.  What  Israel's 
God  is,  or  will  be,  to  His  people  no  present  specification  can  adequately 
express,  but  the  future  will  increasingly  reveal.  The  name  thus  does  not  lay 
stress  upon  God's  self-existence  or  immutability  (though  the  LXX.  renders  it 
by  6  C}v),  but  upon  His  progressive  self-manifestation,  and  conveys  an 
assurance  of  His  active  concern  in  the  fortunes  of  men  and  especially  of 
Israel.^  But  though  this  was  the  significance  which  the  name  had  for  the 
Hebrews  in  historic  times,  it  is  possible  that  its  meaning,  if  the  word  be 
of  great  antiquity,  was  originally  quite  other. 

As  has  been  prcNnously  noticed,  the  passage  in  Ex.  vi.  2  foil.,  (taken 
from  P)  expressly  relates,  in  defiance  of  the  evidence  of  J,  that  the  name 
Jehovah  was  revealed  for  the  first  time  to  Moses,  the  patriarchs  only  knowing 
God  under  the  title  of  El-Shaddai.  Some  scholars  hold  that  E  shared 
the  same  view  as  P,  and  that  Ex.  iii.  9-15  (derived  from  this  source)  is 
meant  to  imply  that  the  name  Jehovah  was  previously  unknown  to  Israel. 
From  this  point  forward,  one  of  the  chief  criteria  of  E  (the  preference 
for  God  [Elohim)  ovtx  Jehovah  in  those  parts  of  the  Hexateuch  which  do  not 
belong  to  the  Priestly  code)  disappears. 

Before  leaving  the  wilderness,  Moses  was  joined  by  Aaron, 
who  met  him  at  Mount  Horeb,  and  the  two  proceeded  together 
to  Egypt.  There  Moses,  with  the  help  of  Aaron,  communicated 
to  his  countr)'men  the  will  of  Jehovah.  As  a  warrant  to  convince 
them  that  he  was  divinely  commissioned,   he  performed  three 

^  Similarly  at  Tyre  fire  is  said  to  have  played  round  a  sacred  olive  tree 
without  scorching  its  leaves;  see  Robertson  Smith,  Rei.  of  Semites,  p.  193. 
«  Ci.Jud  xiii.  22.  «  Cf.  Driver,  Stud.  Bib.,  p.  15  foU. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS       105 

signs  in  succession :  (i)  the  transformation  of  his  rod  into  a 
serpent,  which  was  again  re-transformed  into  a  rod;  (2)  the 
conversion  of  the  flesh  of  his  hand  into  a  leprous  condition,  and 
its  subsequent  restoration ;  (3)  the  transmutation  of  water,  taken 
from  the  Nile,  into  blood.  The  performance  of  these  wonders 
overcame  the  incredulity  of  the  people;  and  they  bowed  their 
heads  and  worshipped  Jehovah  who  had  thus  deigned  to  com- 
passionate them  {Ex.  iv.  1-9,  27-31).  From  their  countrymen 
Moses  and  Aaron  next  proceeded  to  the  court  of  the  Pharaoh, 
and  demanded  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  leave  for  the  Hebrews 
to  go  three  days'  journey  into  the  wilderness  to  hold  a  feast  to 
Him  there.  The  request  to  be  allowed  to  sacrifice  at  a  distance 
was  specious.  The  animals  which  would  be  offered  in  the  con- 
templated sacrifices  were  sacred  in  the  eyes  of  the  Egyptians; 
and  the  Israelite  rites,  if  performed  in  Egypt,  might  excite  popular 
indignation  (cf.  Ex.  viii.  26).  But  the  king,  in  reply,  not  only 
refused  the  permission  (Jehovah  was  not  a  god  he  recognised), 
but  charged  Moses  and  Aaron  with  making  the  people  restless 
and  idle;  and  directed  that  their  tasks  should  be  increased  by 
the  withdrawal  of  the  straw  hitherto  supplied  to  them  for  making 
brick.  For  the  future  they  were  to  procure  this  for  themselves, 
whilst  they  were  still  required  to  deliver  the  same  quantity  of 
bricks.  The  unhappy  slaves,  whose  officers  were  beaten  if  the 
tale  of  bricks  was  short,  were  now  in  a  worse  plight  than  ever,  and 
gave  expression  to  their  anger  and  despair  in  murmurs  against  the 
men  whose  appeals  had  only  served  to  augment  their  distress. 

But  the  refusal  of  the  king  was  not  long-continued,  and  his 
obstinacy  had  to  yield  to  the  compulsion  of  circumstances.  The 
Egyptians  were  suddenly  harassed  and  alarmed  by  a  succession 
of  plagues  similar  to  those  to  which  the  country  is  still  exposed. 
First,  the  water  of  the  Nile  turned  a  blood-red  colour,  and  for 
seven  days  became  undrinkable.  This  visitation  was  followed  by 
swarms  of  frogs,  which  penetrated  even  into  the  houses  and  bed- 
chambers of  the  people.  To  this  succeeded  a  plague  of  flies 
(probably  gadflies^).  Next  the  cattle  and  draught  animals  were 
smitten  with  a  murrain.  Then  a  violent  hailstorm  destroyed  the 
bulk  of  the  crops ;  whilst  the  remainder  was  consumed  by  locusts, 

^  LXX.  Kvuo/xvia;  cf.  Fs.  Ixxviii.  45. 


io6  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

brought  by  an  east  wind.  After  this,  the  light  of  the  sun  was 
obscured  for  three  days  by  sandstorms.  Finally  a  pestilence  broke 
out,  in  which  the  Egyptians  lost  the  flower  of  their  families. 
The  Israelites,  to  avert  from  themselves  the  ravages  which  the 
pestilence  was  bringing  upon  their  masters,  were  directed  by 
Moses  to  observe  a  rite  which  was  already  in  vogue  amongst  them, 
viz.  the  Passover  {Ex.  xii.  21),  which  consisted  in  the  slaughter, 
by  each  household,  of  a  lamb  or  a  kid,  and  the  sprinkling  of  its 
blood  upon  the  lintel  and  side-posts  of  the  door  of  the  house. 
They  carried  out  the  command,  and  from  the  destruction  which 
prevailed  all  around  them  they  were  mercifully  exempted.  Before 
the  misfortunes  that  were  accumulated  upon  his  people  (many 
of  them  the  more  distressing  from  the  cleanliness  characteristic  of 
the  Egyptians),  Pharaoh  gave  way.  According  to  the  narrative, 
indeed,  he  did  so  more  than  once,  under  stress  of  the  immediate 
calamity  and  the  urgent  appeals  of  his  own  servants  {Ex.  x.  7) ; 
but  when  the  respite  came,  he  broke  his  word,  proposing,  instead 
of  the  complete  dismissal  required,  various  compromises  (first 
that  the  Israelites  should  sacrifice  to  Jehovah  in  Egypt  itself,  or, 
at  least,  not  far  away ;  next  that  the  men  should  be  free  to  go, 
but  should  leave  their  children  as  hostages;  and  then  that  all 
should  depart,  but  their  cattle  be  retained).  The  final  disaster, 
however,  made  him  consent  to  everything  that  was  demanded. 
The  distress  in  which  the  rest  of  the  country  was  plunged 
enabled  the  Hebrews  to  effect  their  escape  before  the  sovereign 
could  again  change  his  mind;  and  they  were  even  assisted  by 
some  of  the  Egyptians  themselves,  who,  in  their  alarm,  desired 
the  departure  of  those  to  whose  God  they  attributed  their  mis- 
fortunes, and  with  a  view  to  the  feast  which  they  were  to  keep,  gave 
them  all  they  asked.  Accordingly,  the  Hebrews,  starting  in  such 
haste  that  cakes  of  unleavened  dough  formed  their  last  meal  in 
Egypt  (the  memory  of  which  was  preserved  in  subsequent  times 
by  the  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread),  finally  left  the  land  of  their 
bondage,  taking  with  them  their  flocks  and  herds,  the  treasure 
received  from  the  Egyptians,  and  the  bones  of  Joseph;  and 
accompanied  by  a  mixed  multitude  {Ex.  xii.  38,  Num.  xi.  4), 
they  turned  eastward,  and  directed  their  course  towards  the 
Isthmus  of  Suez  and  the  Red  Sea. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS       107 

The  narrative  dealing  with  the  events  that  followed  Moses'  return  to  Egypt 
and  culminated  in  the  Exodus  {Ex.  vii.-xiv.)  is  composite;  and  the  repre- 
sentation differs  to  some  extent  in  the  sources  employed.  In  the  text  the  com- 
bined account  of  JE  is  followed,  no  attempt  being  made  to  distinguish  their 
respective  contributions.^  According  to  P,  Moses  was  discredited  by  the 
Israelites  when  he  came  to  them  with  Jehovah's  message  {£x.  vi.  9,  12),  and 
no  mention  is  made  of  any  signs  wrought  by  him  to  convince  his  countrymen ; 
but  a  wonder  was  performed  when  he  and  Aaron  appeared  before  Pharaoh, 
Aaron's  rod,  in  answer  to  the  challenge  of  Pharaoh,  being  changed  into  a 
reptile  (perhaps  a  crocodile).  Of  the  plagues  P  enumerates  five,  including 
the  conversion  of  water  into  Blood,  the  multiplication  of  Frogs,  and  the  Pesti- 
lence (recounted  by  JE),  but  extends  the  change  into  blood  and  the  production 
of  frogs  to  every  stream  and  pool  in  Egypt.  In  place  of  JE's  plagues  of 
Flies,  Murrain,  Hail,  Locusts,  and  Darkness  (the  first  three  and  the  last  of 
these  are  represented  as  not  extending  to  Goshen),  the  writer  substitutes  a 
plague  of  Lice  (or  perhaps  gnats  ^),  and  a  plague  of  Blains,  affecting  both 
man  and  beast.  In  his  account,  the  Egyptian  magicians  are  described  as 
attempting  to  rival  Moses  and  Aaron  in  their  wonders :  they  convert  their 
rods  into  reptiles  (which,  however,  are  swallowed  up  by  Aaron's  rod),  and 
change  water  into  blood,  and  bring  up  frogs  from  the  river ;  but  they  fail  to 
create  lice  (or  gnats),  and  like  the  rest  of  their  countrymen  they  suffer  from 
the  plague  of  blains.  The  writer  thus  saw  in  the  plagues  a  contest  between 
the  God  of  the  Hebrews  and  the  gods  of  Egypt,  ending  in  the  triumph  of  the 
former  (cf.  £x.  xii.  12). 

In  both  of  the  constituent  narratives  the  plagues  are  conceived  to  have 
been  miraculously  produced,  in  P  by  Aaron  stretching  out  his  rod,  in  JE 
generally  by  some  corresponding  action  on  the  part  of  Moses.  It  is  not  im- 
probable that  both  Moses  and  the  Egyptian  magicians  were  acquainted  with 
much  that  in  that  age  passed  for  magic.  But  the  character  of  the  plagues, 
in  the  main,  suggests  that  they  were  in  reality  natural  occurrences  which  were 
interpreted  by  the  Hebrew  writers  in  accordance  with  their  religious  beliefs. 
Frogs,  flies,  and  locusts  are  common  pests  of  the  country.  Violent  murrains 
or  cattle  plagues  are  recorded  to  have  taken  place  there  within  the  last 
century.  Hailstorms,  accompanied  by  lightning,  though  not  common,  are 
not  unknown.  The  bloody  appearance  of  the  Nile  might  be  produced  by  the 
intermixture  with  it  of  mineral  matter  or  minute  animal  organisms,  brought 
down  from  its  upper  reaches.  The  darkness  was  probably  the  result  of  the 
khamsin  wind,  a  hot  southern  blast  which  blows  at  intervals  for  nearly  two 
months  about  the  time  of  the  spring  equinox,  and  fills  the  air  with  dust  and 
sand.  That  the  final  plague  was  a  pestilence  is  indicated  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  50-5 1 
and  perhaps  Am.  iv.  10  (cf.  a  Sam.  xxiv.  15-16).  The  representation  that 
only  the  eldest  son  in  each  family  was  destroyed  is  perhaps  due  to  a  somewhat 
fanciful  parallel  between  the  firstborn  of  Jehovah  {i.e.  Israel)  and  the  firstborn 
of  Pharaoh  and  his  subjects  (see  Ex.  iv.  22-23),  the  latter  being  slain  to 
avenge  the  oppression  of  the  former.     Others  thank  that  the  firstborn  of  the 

*  According  to  JE  the  plagues  numbered  eight  in  all.  Those  scholars 
who  believe  that  they  can  accurately  distinguish  between  J  and  E  assign 
seven  plagues  to  J  and  five  to  E,  four  being  common  to  both  (water  turned  to 
Blood,  Hail,  Locusts,  and  Pestilence),  three  peculiar  to  J  (Frogs,  Flies,  and 
Murrain),  and  one  peculiar  to  E  (Darkness),  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  the 
seven  plagues  mentioned  by  J  are  just  those  enumerated  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  44-50 
(if  with  two  MSS.  murrain  is  read  for  hail  in  ver.  48);  see  Kirkpatrick,  ad.  loc, 

'  LXX.  (rKv1<p€Sf  insects  which  attacked  figs  and  the  bark  of  trees. 


io8  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Egyptians  were  regarded  as  a  substitute  for  the  firstborn  of  the  cattle  which 
the  Israelites  were  being  prevented  by  Pharaoh  from  offering  to  Jehovah  at  the 
feast  they  wished  to  keep  in  the  wilderness  {Ex.  viii.  27,  x.  9,  26,  xiii.  12). 

The  Passover,  which  seems  to  have  already  been  in  existence  in  Moses* 
time  {£x.  xii.  21  the  Passover),  was  probably  an  ancient  rite,  wherein  the 
firstlings  of  the  flock  were  offered  in  sacrifice  by  every  household  for  the 
purpose  of  establishing  a  covenant  or  communion  with  the  Deity  (cf.  p.  I45)» 
the  participation  in  it  of  all  the  members  of  the  family  being  indicated  by 
putting  some  of  the  blood  upon  the  door  of  the  house.  The  relation  thereby 
constituted  between  Israel  and  Jehovah  was  beUeved  to  ensure  the  protection 
of  the  former  from  the  pestilence  that  smote  the  Eg}'ptians.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Feast  of  Unleavened  Bread,  which  kept  aUve  the  recollection  of 
their  deUverance  firom  bondage  {Ex.  xiii.  7-8),  was  probably  an  agricultural 
festival,  connected  with  the  beginning  of  the  harvest,  with  which  they  became 
acquainted  in  Canaan,  and  to  which  memories  of  the  Exodus  became  attached. 
The  two  feasts  followed  each  other  in  close  succession,  and  were  frequently 
treated  as  one. 

The  exact  line  of  march  pursued  by  the  people  after  leaving 

Goshen  cannot  now  be  traced.     It  is  clear  that  they  did  not 

follow  the  Mediterranean  coast,^  along  which  they  might  have 

come  in  contact  with  Egyptian  troops  (for  Canaan  since  the  time 

of  Thothmes  I.  had  been  often  traversed,  and  in  part  occupied, 

by  Eg}T)tian  armies),  and  it  is  probable  that  they  would  from  the 

first  seek  to  join  the  Midianites  near  Sinai;   but  the  localities 

through  which  they  passed  cannot  be  identified  with  certainty. 

From  Rameses  (which,  in  Ex.  xii.  37,  JVum.  xxxiii.  5,  is  regarded 

as   their   starting   point)   they   are   described    as  journeying   to 

Succoth,2  vvhich   has  been  taken  to   be  a   Hebrew  corruption 

of  T/iaku  or  Thuket^  the  name  of  the  district  in  which  the  city 

of   Pithom  was   situated;    and  from  thence   they  removed  to 

Etham.s     They   next    encamped    before    Pihahiroth,    between 

Migdol  and  the  sea,  east  of  Baal  Zephon,  their  movements  here 

being  so  erratic  as  to  suggest  to  anyone  observing  them  that  they 

had  lost  their  way  (cf.  Ex.  xiv.  3).     The  sea  must  have  been  the 

Gulf  of  Suez ;   but  many  authorities  suppose  with  much  plausi- 

bihty  that  the  gulf  then  stretched  further  to  the  north  than  it 

does  now,  and  extended  to  the  Bitter  Lakes  and  Lake  Timsah, 

^  Since  the  Philistines  did  not  settle  in  Canaan  before  the  reign  of 
Rameses  III.,  the  phrase  "land  of  the  Philistines"  in  Ex.  xiii.  17  anticipates 
a  condition  of  things  that  had  not  yet  arisen. 

'  The  word  Succoth  in  Hebrew  mean  "booths,"  such  as  were  used  in  the 
Feast  of  Tabernacles.  But  the  construction  of  these  would  be  out  of  the 
question  at  this  stage  of  the  journey,  even  if  materials  were  procurable. 

'  The  E.  frontier  of  Egypt  was  guarded  by  a  line  of  fortresses  called 
Khctem^  a  term  which  has  been  supposed  to  survive  in  the  name  Etham. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        109 

and  believe  that  the  Israelites  reached  it  near  Ismailia.  On  the 
other  hand,  some  identify  Baal  Zephon  with  Mt.  Attaka,i  ^nd  so 
bring  the  Israelites  into  the  neighbourhood  of  the  modern  town 
of  Suez.  However  this  may  be,  the  fugitives,  in  the  position 
they  occupied,  soon  found  themselves  in  great  danger.  Pharaoh, 
recovering  from  the  dismay  caused  by  the  recent  pestilence,  and 
realising  that  the  Hebrews,  instead  of  departing  on  a  temporary 
pilgrimage  {Ex.  v.  3,  xii.  31),  had  gone  altogether  (Ex.  xiv.  5), 
despatched  a  large  force  of  chariots  (given  as  600)  in  pursuit  of 
the  escaping  multitude,  which  overtook  them  in  a  spot  where 
they  had  the  sea  in  front  of  them  and  the  wilderness  around 
them.  The  Hebrews  were  filled  with  the  utmost  alarm,  and 
reproached  Moses  with  having  lured  them  to  their  destruction. 
But  it  providentially  happened  that  a  strong  gale  from  the  east 
had  so  affected  the  shallow  waters  at  the  head  of  the  gulf  as  to 
render  a  passage  to  the  other  side  practicable ;  and  Moses  seized 
the  opportunity  offered.  He  dashed  across ;  and  was  followed 
by  the  Egyptians,  who  seem  to  have  overtaken  the  Hebrews  and 
engaged  them  (cf.  Deitt.  iv.  34).  But  the  pursuers  were  terrified 
by  the  lightnings  that  burst  from  a  heavy  cloud  near  {Ex.  xiv.  24) ; 
and  finding  besides  that  the  wheels  of  their  heavy  chariots  be- 
came clogged  2  in  the  soft  and  yielding  sand,  lost  heart,  and 
attempted  to  regain  the  western  shore.  But  meanwhile,  the 
wind  had  veered,  and  the  sea  returned  to  its  usual  bed.  The 
Egyptians  were  consequently  caught  before  they  reached  secure 
ground,  and  perished  miserably  in  the  waters.  The  Hebrews, 
led  by  Miriam,  celebrated  their  deliverance  by  a  triumphal  paean, 
which  still  exists  {Ex.  xv.  1-2 1),  though  seemingly  expanded  and 
modified  by  later  additions.^ 

The  means  by  which  the  passage  of  the  Red  Sea  was  made  feasible  is 
apparent  enough  from  the  account  in  Ex.  xiv.  21,  but  the  precise  course 

}  Josephus,  Ant.  ii.  15.  3,  describes  them  as  being  shut  up  **  between 
inaccessible  precipices  and  the  sea;  for  a  mountain  terminated  at  the  sea, 
which  WIS  impassable  by  reason  of  the  ruggedr.ess  of  its  tracks. 

'^  The  Heb.  of  Ex.  xiv.  25  has  Jehovah  took  off  their  chariot  wheels  ;  but 
the  LXX.  reads  avv^drjae  tovs  &^ovas  twv  apfidruv  avrcov. 

'  See  especially  ver.  13,  15,  17.  The  allusions  to  Jehovah's  "holy 
habitation "  and  His  "sanctuary  "  imply  for  this  part  of  the  song  (ver.  13-17)  a 
date  subsequent  to  the  Conquest  and  the  establishment  of  the  Ark  at  Shiloh, 
if  not  to  the  erection  of  Solomon's  Temple. 


/ 


no  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

of  events  is  obscure.  On  the  supposition  that  the  sea  then  reached  to  Lake 
Timsah  and  that  the  E.  wind  named  was  more  exactly  a  S.E.  wind,  the 
shallow  waters  may  have  been  driven  to  the  N.W.  ;  and  if  at  the  same  time 
an  ebb  tide  drew  the  main  body  of  the  sea  southward,  a  track  would  be  left 
across  which  the  IsraeUtes  could  march,  with  water  on  either  hand.  This 
agrees  fairly  with  the  representation  in  verses  22,  29,  where,  however,  the 
language  of  the  song  (xv.  8)  is  taken  au  pied  de  la  lettre  and  the  waters 
described  as  being  a  wall  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the  left.  It  is  also  stated 
that  the  sea  was  divided  and  afterwards  restored  to  its  channel  by  Moses 
stretching  his  rod  over  it  (ver.  16,  26-27). 

The  conception  of  the  Pillar  of  Cloud  which  guided  the  Israelites  by  day, 
and  the  Pillar  of  Fire  which  led  them  by  night^  (-fix.  xiii.  21-22)  may  have 
originated  in  a  thunderstorm  which,  gathering  during  the  flight  of  the 
Israelites,  broke  as  the  Eg>'ptians  followed  the  fugitives  across  the  sea  (see 
Ex.  xiv.  24,  and  cf.  Ps.  Ixxvii.  17-20).'^  Such  an  occurrence,  coupled  with 
the  belief  that  the  host  was  providentially  guided  by  Jehovah  (Who  was 
thought  to  manifest  His  presence  more  particularly  by  fire),  might  readily, 
amongst  a  religious  and  imaginative  people,  give  rise  to  the  tradition. 

The  number  of  the  Israelites  who  left  Eg}'pt  is  given  in  Ex.  xii.  37  as 
6oo,cxxD  men,  beside  women  and  children.  Approximately  the  same  figures 
are  recorded  in  connection  with  a  census  taken  in  the  following  year 
(Num.  i.  46,  Ex.  xxxviii.  26,  cf.  also  Num.  xi.  21),  and  again  at  the 
close  of  the  wanderings  {Num.  xxvi.  51),  where  only  men  of  twenty  years 
old  and  upwards  are  included.  This  number  has  been  calculated  to  imply 
a  total  of  2,000,000  persons,  which  appears  far  too  large  a  body  to  have 
crossed  the  Red  Sea  as  easily  and  as  rapidly  as  is  represented,  or  to  have 
found  support  in  a  desert  country  now  occupied  by  a  few  thousand  people 
(even  if,  as  has  been  thought  probable,  the  Sinaitic  peninsula  was  more  fertile 
formerly  than  it  is  now).  There  are,  besides,  several  passages  which  are  at 
variance  with  the  statement  that  there  were  among  the  Israehtes  at  this  time 
half  a  million  fighting  men  ;  see  Ex.  xxiii.  29-30,  Nztm.  xiii.  31. 

Only  one  reference  to  the  Hebrews  has  been  produced  from  Egyptian 
sources  of  this  age,  and  this  can  hardly  relate  to  the  Exodus  (see  p.  12 1). 
In  Manetho,  preserved  by  Josephus  {c.  Ap.  i.  26,  27),  there  occurs  what  is 
possibly  a  distorted  account  of  the  departure  of  the  IsraeUtes.  This  states 
that  Memptah  (Amenophis)  was  directed  to  clear  the  land  of  a  number  of 
lepers.  These,  amounting  to  80,000,  were  collected  and  placed  by  him  on 
the  E.  of  the  Nile  and  compelled  to  work  in  quarries.  They  were  sub- 
sequently allowed  to  occupy  a  city  called  Avaris,  where  they  rose  in  rebellion 
under  a  priest  called  Osarsiph,  who  changed  his  name  to  Moses,  and  pro- 
hibited the  worship  of  the  Egyptian  gods.  The  rebels  were  aided  by  the 
descendants  of  the  Hyksos,  who  had  occupied  Jerusalem,  and  with  these 
became  masters  of  Egypt  for  thirteen  years.  Memptah  retired  to  Ethiopia ;  but 
he  eventually  returned,  and  the  invaders  were  then  defeated  and  expelled 
from  the  country. 

*  According  to  Ex.  xiv.  19,  20,  the  pillar  of  cloud  which  went  before  the 
Israelite  host  removed  and  stood  behind  them,  between  the  camp  of  Egypt 
and  the  camp  of  Israel ;  and  the  obscure  words  "there  was  the  cloud  and  the 
darkness,  yet  gave  it  light  by  night,"  are  generally  supposed  to  mean  that 
the  cloud  gave  light  to  Israel  in  front,  but  showed  dark  to  the  enemy  behind. 
The  LXX.,  however,  has  Ka.\  tyhero  axdros  Kal  yv6(pos  Kal  dirfKOev  rj  v6^. 

'  Cf.  Jos.  Afti.  ii.  16,  3,  6fi^poi  T€  cLTOvpavov  Kare^aivov  Kal  ^poyrcU  (TKXrjpal 
rpoce^aTTOfUvrjs  iaTpairTjs  Kal  K^pavvol  5e  Karriv^dr^aav. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        in 

The  northern  portion  of  the  peninsula  of  Sinai  is  a  high, 
monotonous,  and  barren  table-land  (called  El-Tifi)^  edged  by  a 
narrow  and  comparatively  level  coast-track;  whereas  the  southern 
angle  is  occupied  by  a  group  of  peaks,  clothed  to  some  extent 
with  vegetation,  and  separated  by  a  number  of  narrow  valleys, 
in  which  springs  occur.  One  or  two  similar  valleys  or  wddies 
lead  from  the  plateau  in  the  centre  to  the  sea;  and  it  was  at 
the  streams  that  watered  these  that  the  Israelites  hoped  to  find 
refreshment  as  they  pressed  towards  the  south.  Leaving  the 
spot  where  they  had  crossed  the  Red  Sea,  they  advanced  through 
the  desert  of  Shur  {Ex.  xv.  22)  or  Etham,  in  the  direction  of  the 
narrow  track  already  alluded  to,  which  skirts  the  shore.  Reaching 
after  three  days'  march  a  spring  named  Marah  (probably  the 
modern  Ayiin  MUsa^  near  Suez),  they  found  it  to  be  so  bitter 
and  nauseous  that  it  was  undrinkable.  Moses,  however, 
rendered  it  sweet  by  casting  into  it  the  branches  of  a  certain 
tree,  a  device  said  to  be  still  employed  by  the  Arabs.  ^  They 
next  passed  through  an  oasis  called  Elim,  near  the  coast  {Num. 
xxxiii.  9),  described  as  consisting  of  twelve  springs  of  water 
and  seventy  palm  trees  (and  identified  by  some  with  the  Wddy 
Ghurundel),  where  (according  to  the  chronology  of  Ex.^)  they 
stayed  a  month;  and  then  proceeding  along  the  coast  {Num. 
xxxiii.  10)  they  entered  the  wilderness  of  Sin.  This  has  been 
identified  with  a  plain,  four  or  five  miles  broad,  into  which  the 
coast-track  expands,  called  El  Markka.  In  it  the  two  places 
named  in  the  Itinerary  {Num.  xxxiii.  12-13)  Dophkah  and 
Alush  were  presumably  situated,  the  first  of  which  has  been 
identified  with  the  Wddy  Magkara.  It  was  in  this  desert  region 
that  they  first  began  to  experience  privation  from  lack  of  sufficient 
sustenance;  for  though  they  possessed  flocks  and  herds,  they, 
like  the  Arabs  in  general,  were  seemingly  not  accustomed  to 
treat  them  as  ordinary  articles  of  food.     In  their  distress  they 

^  This  identification  assumes  that  the  Israelites  crossed  the  sea  near 
Lake  Timsah.  If  the  passage  was  effected  near  Suez,  Marah  must  be  placed 
further  south  (to  allow  for  the  three  days),  probably  at  Ain  Hawara. 

^  F.  de  Lesseps,  VIsthme  de  Suez,  cited  by  Maspero,  Struggle  of  the 
Nations^  p.  445 ;  cf.  the  somewhat  similar  act  ascribed  to  Elisha  {s  Kg.  iL 
19-22). 

'  Cf.  Ex.  xvi.  I  with  xii.  1-4 


112  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

broke  into  loud  murmurings  against  their  leaders,  and  expressed 
their  bitter  regret  at  having  left  Egypt,  where  they  had  not 
known  scarcity.  They  obtained  some  relief,  however,  by  falling 
in  with  flights  of  quails  (Ex.  xvi.  13),  birds  which  Josephus 
{Anf.  iii.  i,  5)  describes  as  more  plentiful  on  the  Arabian  gulf 
than  anywhere  else,^  and  which  are  still  numerous  in  the  penin- 
sula and  the  neighbouring  countries  of  Palestine  and  Syria.  In 
their  need  they  also  became  acquainted  with,  and  utilised  as  food, 
Manna,  a  substance  hitherto  strange  to  them,  which  exudes  from 
the  branches  of  the  tamarisk  and  a  few  other  shrubs  when 
punctured  by  insects.  ^  From  the  wilderness  of  Sin  Moses  now 
led  his  people  in  the  direction  of  the  sacred  Mount  of  Horeb 
or  Sinai  (following  what  is  now  the  IVddy  Ert'rdn)  to  a  place 
called  Rephidim  {£x.  xvii.  i,  6).  Here^  they  again  suffered 
from  want  of  water,  and  their  murmurs  against  Moses  and  Aaron 
were  renewed.  Their  wants  were  eventually  supplied;  but  the 
memory  of  the  people's  discontent  was  preserved  by  the  names 
Massah  (Proving)  and  Mtribah  (Strife)  given  to  the  scenes  of 
their  outbreak. 

The  providential  character  of  the  supply  of  manna  (which,  in  reality,  is 
found  in  comparatively  small  quantities)  is,  in  Ex.  xvi.  and  elsewhere, 
heightened  by  its  being  represented  as  forming  the  staple  food  of  the  people  for 
forty  years  {ci,Josh.  v.  12),  and  as  occurring  only  on  six  days  of  the  week,  the 
amount  procured  on  the  sixth  sufficing  for  the  following  Sabbath.  The  narrative 
(which  comes  in  part  from  the  Priestly  source)  adds  that  the  manna  gathered  by 
each  man,  whether  much  or  little,  exactly  satisfied  his  needs  (ver.  18).  The 
water  with  which  the  people's  wants  were  suppHed  at  Massah  and  Meribah  is 
described  in  Ex.  xvii.  6  (cf.  Deut.  viii.  15)  as  being  produced  from  the  rock 
in  Horeb  by  a  stroke  of  Moses'  rod :  but  this  may  arise  from  a  poetical 
account  of  a  more  ordinary,  though  not  less  providential,  incident  (cf.  Num, 
xxi.  16-18). 

^  Or  than  anything  else  {rpitpu  tovto  rb  Sppeov  wj  oi/d^i/  irepov  b  Apd^ioi 

KbXTTOS). 

'  The  name  manna  is  explained  as  arising  from  the  question  of  the 
Israelites  on  first  seeing  it,  M&n  hu\  "what  is  it?"  In  some  passages  it  is 
regarded  as  falling  from  heaven  with  the  dew  {Num.  xi.  9),  a  belief  resembling 
that  which  prevailed  amongst  the  Greeks  and  Romans  respecting  honey 
(cf.  Verg.  E,  iv.  30,  roscida  mella).  It  is  described  as  resembling,  in  size, 
flakes  of  hoar-frost  or  grains  of  coriander  seed,  and  in  appearance,  bdellium 
(a  resinous  gum) ;  its  taste  is  variously  said  to  have  been  like  that  of  wafers 
mixed  with  honey,  or  cakes  baked  with  oil  {Ex.  xvi.  14,  31,  Num.  xi.  7-8). 

"^  In  Ex.  xvii.  6  the  incident  is  placed  at  Horeb,  but  a  comparison  of  xvii.  i 
with  xix,  I  implies  that  the  people  had  only  reached  Rephidim.  Neverthe- 
less Rephidim  must  have  been  near  Horeb. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        113 

The  approach  to  the  holy  ground  of  Horeb  was  not  effected 
without  molestation.  A  formidable  attack  was  made  upon  them 
by  a  body  of  Amalekites,  who  partly  resented  the  intrusion  of 
Israel  upon  ground  which  they  regarded  as  their  own,  and  partly 
sought  to  gratify  their  desire  for  plunder.  The  Amalekites  first 
directed  their  assault  upon  the  rear  and  the  stragglers  {Deut.  xxv. 
18),  and  then  gathered  their  forces  for  a  general  engagement. 
The  fighting  men  among  the  Israelites  were  placed  in  charge  of 
Hoshea  or  Joshua,  an  Ephraimite ;  and  an  engagement  ensued 
in  which  the  Amalekites  were  worsted.  Moses,  who,  with  the 
rod  of  God  uplifted  in  his  hand,  watched  the  fight,  supported  by 
Aaron  and  Hur  (the  latter  said  by  Josephus  to  have  been  the 
husband  of  Miriam),  erected  an  altar  to  commemorate  the 
deliverance,  which  he  called  Jehovah  nissi  (Jehovah  is  my 
banner).!  If  Josephus  {Ant.  iii.  2,  4)  is  to  be  followed,  the 
Israelites  acquired  considerable  spoil  as  the  fruits  of  the  victory ; 
but  the  unprovoked  attack  produced  such  a  feeling  of  resentment 
among  them  that  a  record  of  the  injury  was  made  with  a  view  to 
subsequent  retaliation.  At  length  arrived  at  Horeb  or  Sinai,  the 
people  camped  before  the  mount;  and  as  this  implies  the 
existence,  at  its  foot,  of  open  ground,  the  circumstance  is  in 
favour  of  the  identification  of  it  with  the  modern  Gebel  Musa 
rather  than  with  Serial  (see  p.  102,  note).  Gebel  Musa  over- 
looks a  plain  (called  Er  Rahah)  of  considerable  extent,  offering 
sufficient  room  for  a  large  encampment;  and  the  approach  to 
it  is  much  more  easily  traversed  than  is  the  case  with  the  rival 
peak. 2  Moses,  after  he  had  taken  up  a  position  there,  was 
joined  by  his  father-in-law  Jethro,  who  brought  with  him  Moses' 
wife,  and  his  two  sons  Gershom  and  Eliezer.  Jethro,  as  was 
natural,  shared  in  the  rejoicings  which  the  escape  from  Egypt 
and  the  successful  march  just  accomplished  occasioned ;  and  he, 
together  with  Aaron  and  the  elders  of  Israel,  offered  sacrifices 
to  Jehovah,  and  partook  of  the  accompanying  feast.  By  his 
advice  Moses  now  proceeded  to  organise  a  judicial  system  more 
adequate  for  the  needs  of  the  people  than  had  hitherto  prevailed. 

^  For  the  bestowal  of  such  a  name  upon  an  altar  cf.  Gen.  xxxiii.  20, 
Jtid.  vi.  24. 

*  See  Harper,  The  Bible  and  Modern  Discoveries ^  pp.  105,  1 1 1. 
1 


114  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Over  the  various  tribal  and  family  divisions  a  certain  amount  of 
authority  was  exercised  (as  had  been  the  case  from  the  earhest 
times)  by  their  respective  elders;  but  all  cases  of  controversy 
were  brought  to  Moses,  whose  decisions  were  accepted  as  those 
of  the  Deity  Himself  {Ex.  xviii.  15-16,  cf  Deut.  i.  17).  The 
work,  however,  had  grown  beyond  one  man's  strength  to  perform ; 
and  Jethro  before  departing  {Ex.  xviii.  27)  to  his  own  people, 
recommended  his  son-in-law  to  delegate  some  of  his  duties  to 
others,  who  might  deal  with  the  smaller  disputes,  whilst  the 
more  important  ones  were  still  reserved  for  himself  to  determine. 
The  counsel  thus  offered  was  followed ;  ''  rulers  of  thousands, 
rulers  of  hundreds,  rulers  of  fifties,  and  rulers  of  tens"^  were 
invested  with  judicial  authority;  and  Moses  was  thus  enabled 
to  apply  himself  more  effectively  to  the  reformation  and  develop- 
ment of  the  prevailing  social,  moral,  and  religious  ideas  of  his 
people. 

Deut.  i.  6-18  is  at  variance  with  Ex.  xviii.,  which  is  here  followed,  in 
implying  that  the  appointment  of  the  judges  was  not  made  until  shortly  be- 
iore  the  departure  of  the  camp  from  Horeb.  Deiit.  further  differs  from  Ex. 
in  ignoring  Jethro  and  in  representing  Moses  as  bidding  the  people  select 
their  heads  for  themselves,  though  he  conferred  upon  them,  when  selected, 
the  needful  authority. 

Of  the  circumstances  under  which  the  legislation  attributed  to 
Moses  was  promulgated  a  perfectly  satisfactory  account  is  im- 
possible, partly  in  consequence  of  the  confusion  prevailing 
amongst  the  records,  and  partly  in  consequence  of  the  dramatic 
character  of  their  descriptions.  There  appear  to  be  portions  of 
no  less  than  three  narratives  (corresponding  to  the  three  sources 
of  which  the  first  four  books  of  the  Pentateuch  are  composed), 
which  differ  considerably  alike  in  the  contents  of  the  legislation 
and  in  the  incidents  attending  it.  They  agree  generally,  however, 
in  representing  that  a  body  of  legal  enactments  was  given  to 
Israel  at  Sinai  by  Moses,  who  received  them  by  personal  com- 
munication from  the  Deity,  amid  the  awe-inspiring  accompani 
ments  of  a  theophany ;  that  some  of  these  laws  were  inscribed 
upon  two  tables  of  stone;  that  during  Moses'  absence  on  the 
mountain,  the  people  made  and  worshipped  a  calf  of  gold  as 

^  In  later  times  these  appellations  described  military  officers ;  see  /  Sam.  viii. 
12,  xxii.  7,  2  Kg.  i.  9. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        115 

a  visible  symbol  of  Jehovah;  that  Moses  on  returning  and 
hearing  of  what  had  been  done,  cast  down,  in  his  indignation, 
the  tables  of  stone  and  broke  them,  and  then  destroyed  and 
ground  to  powder  the  idolatrous  image;  that  the  broken  tables 
were  replaced  by  a  second  pair,  which,  as  embodying  a  covenant 
made  between  Jehovah  and  Israel,  were  placed  in  an  Ark  of 
acacia  wood,  which  was  thenceforward  called  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant  of  Jehovah  (see  Deut.  x.  1-5,^  Num.  x.  33,  xiv.  44) ;  and 
that  the  Ark  was  kept  in  a  Tent  or  Tabernacle,^  to  which  all  who 
sought  the  presence  of  Jehovah  used  to  resort,  and  which  was 
consequently  known  as  the  Tent  of  Meeting.  The  scenic 
character  of  the  description  of  Jehovah's  descent  upon  Sinai 
and  His  converse  with  Moses,  finds  a  parallel  in  many  rhetorical 
passages  of  the  Psalms  and  Prophets,^  and  is  doubtless  to  be 
explained  similarly.  In  these  any  signal  event  in  which  the  hand 
of  God  is  discerned  is  depicted  as  accompanied  by  disturbances 
in  the  elements  and  by  convulsions  of  nature.  In  the  light  of 
such,  it  seems  reasonable  to  regard  the  narratives  recounting  the 
delivery  of  the  Law  at  Sinai  as  a  dramatic  picture,  the  details  of 
which  are  not  to  be  pressed.  The  Divine  communications  made 
to  Moses  were  presumably  internal  rather  than  external;  and 
were  imparted  through  the  avenues  of  reflection  and  conscience 
rather  than  by  the  outward  hearing.  Yet  it  is  not  impossible 
that  in  the  locality  where  the  events  are  placed  there  may  really 
have  occurred  natural  phenomena  which  are  reflected  in  the 
narrative.  To  the  race,  and  in  the  age,  to  which  Moses  be- 
longed, all  that  was  startling  or  exceptional  in  nature  unmistak- 
ably manifested  Divine  power;  and  lightning  and  tempest,  '■'-^ 
particular,  were  associated  by  the  Hebrews  with  Jehovah'b 
presence.  Consequently  the  storms  that  occasionally  burst 
round  the  top  of  Sinai  may  easily  have  impressed  the  spirit  of 

^  This  passage  in  Deut,  is  doubtless  based  on  JE,  though  no  mention  of 
the  construction  of  the  Ark  appears  in  the  sections  of  the  latter  document 
that  have  been  preserved  in  Exodus. 

'  The  mention  of  this  in  Ex.  xxxiii.  7  (JE)  is  abrupt,  no  account  of  its 
construction  having  been  previously  given.  A  subsequent  account  of  it  occurs 
in  XXXV.  foil.  (P),  but  the  conception  of  it  in  the  Priestly  code  differs  widely 
from  that  in  JE  (cf.  p.  141). 

•  See  Ps.  xviii.  7  foil.,  Mic.  i.  3,  4,  Hob.  iii.  3-6. 


ii6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  Israelite  leader  with  a  sense  of  God's  nearness;  whilst  the 
thunder  may  have  been  to  him  something  more  than  a  mere 
symbol  of  the  Divine  voice  (cf.  Fs.  xxix.  3-9).^  But  though  Sinai 
must  have  been  the  scene  of  a  portion  of  Moses'  legislation,  it  is 
not  likely  to  have  been  the  scene  of  all  that  he  actually  initiated, 
still  less  of  all  that  he  is  credited  with.  On  the  one  hand  the 
narrative,  just  repeated,  recording  the  appointment  of  judges  to 
assist  Moses  suggests  that  the  successive  oral  decisions  of  such 
judges  were  among  the  sources  of  Hebrew  law,  and  could  only 
accumulate  gradually.  And  on  the  other  hand,  a  review  of  all 
the  legislation  ascribed  to  Moses  in  the  Pentateuch  exhibits 
discrepancies  so  serious  that  it  is  difficult  to  regard  it  as  pro- 
ceeding from  one  individual  or  even  from  one  age.  The  number 
of  distinct  codes,  partly  duplicating  and  partly  contradicting  each 
other,  and  the  many  divergences  which,  as  will  be  seen,  are  dis- 
cernible between  their  enactments  as  a  whole  and  the  usage  of 
the  times  immediately  succeeding,  combine  to  render  it  probable 
that  the  legislation  of  the  complete  Pentateuch  is  Mosaic  in 
inception  and  germ  rather  than  in  its  ultimate  shape.  Further 
consideration,  however,  of  this  question  must  be  reserved  till  later. 

The  details  with  which  the  general  outline  given  above  is  filled  in 
present  many  repetitions  and  divergences.  Thus,  (i)  according  to  the  main 
tenor  of  Ex.  xix.,  xx.,  it  was  God's  purpose  to  deliver  all  His  commands 
in  the  audience  of  the  people  assembled  to  meet  Him  at  the  foot  of  Sinai 
(xix.  9,  17,  XX.  22) ;  but  the  people,  after  hearing  the  Decalogue,  in  their 
fear  prayed  that  the  Divine  communications  should  only  be  made  to  them 
through  Moses  (xx.  19,  cf.  xxiv.  3,  Deut.  v.  4-5,  22-31).  On  the  other 
hand  xix.  12-13  states  that  the  people  in  general  were  forbidden  on  pain 
of  death  to  ascend  the  mount,  or  even  to  touch  it,  but  certain  persons  [they 
in  ver.  13  is  emphatic),  who  in  ver.  22,  24  appear  to  be  Moses,  Aaron,  and 
other  priests,  were  summoned  into  the  mount  as  intermediaries  between  God 
and  the  people ;  and  it  is  in  accord  with  this  latter  representation  that  in 
xxiv.  I,  9-1 1  Aaron,  Nadab,  Abihu  and  seventy  elders  accompany  Moses 
up  the  mount,  behold  God,  and  eat  and  drink  there.  (2)  In  xix.  19,  xx.  18 
a  trumpet  is  heard  and  the  people  tremble;  but  in  xix.  13  (marg.)  a  ranCi 
horn  is  the  signal  for  coining  up  into  the  mount.  (3)  In  xxiv.  12-14,  Moses, 
accompanied  by  Joshua,  ascends  into  the  mountain  to  obtain  the  tables 
of  stone  and  the  law  (written  by  God)  which  he  is  to  teach  the  people 
(ver.  12),  whilst  Aaron  is  left  in  the  camp  (ver.  14) ;  and  agreeably  with 
this  in  xxxii.  i  foil.  Aaron  is  the  maker  of  the  Golden  Calf,  whilst  Joshua 
(ver.  17)  calls  Moses'  attention  to  the  noise  in  the  camp,  and  in  the  issue 
(ver.    35),  Jehovah,  rejecting   Moses'  appeal   (ver.    32),  smites  the  people 

^  Travellers  relate  that  the  presence  of  strange  noises  is  a  feature  of  these 
mountains,  sounds  being  carried  to  a  great  distance  (Stanley,  S.  andP.^  p.  13) 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        117 

because  of  the  calf.  On  the  other  hand,  in  xxxii.  7-14  Jehovah  Himself 
apprises  Moses  of  the  people's  sin,  whilst  at  the  latter's  intercession  He 
repents  of  the  evil  which  He  said  He  would  do  to  them,  and  the  offenders 
are  punished  by  Moses  who  summons  the  sons  of  Levi  (which  does  not 
harmonise  well  with  the  previous  representation  that  Aaron  had  been 
among  the  guilty)  to  slay  the  idolaters  (ver.  26-28).^  These  differences 
point  to  the  existence  of  two  versions  of  the  incidents  in  question,  from 
E  and  J  respectively,  which  have  been  united  together. ^  In  the  subsequent 
narrative  the  second  tables  which  are  substituted  for  those  broken  by  Moses, 
are  described  as  like  unto  the  first  (xxxiv.  i,  cf.  Deut.  x.  2-4) ;  but  the 
Hebrew  phrases  used  of  them  differ,^  as  also  do  the  commandments  in- 
scribed upon  them  (contrast  xx.  2-17  with  xxxiv.  14-26).  It  is  probable, 
therefore,  that  whilst  the  account  of  the  first  tables  comes  from  one  source 
(E),  that  of  the  second  comes  from  the  other  (J).  Again,  in  Ex.  xxv.-xxxi. 
and  XXXV. -xL,  together  with  the  book  of  Leviticus  and  a  part  of  Numbers^ 
a  multitude  of  ritual  and  other  directions  are  given,  which  differ  largely 
in  matter  but  to  a  still  greater  extent  in  spirit  from  the  legislation  (viewed 
as  a  whole)  which  is  included  in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  and  c.  xxxiv.  These  must, 
therefore,  be  derived  from  a  third  source,  which,  as  already  stated,  has  been 
termed  the  Priestly  Code.  The  discrepancies  between  the  requirements  of 
this  and  the  other  codes,  as  well  as  Deuteronomy y  will  be  examined  in  detail 
in  the  following  chapter. 

The  time  spent  at  Sinai  seems  to  have  been  something  less 
than  a  year  {Ex.  xix.  i,  compared  with  Nu7n.  x.  11).  Before 
breaking  up  the  encampment  Moses  requested  Hobab  (if  he 
can  be  regarded  as  distinct  from  Jethro,  who  had  already  left, 
according  to  Ex.  xviii.  27)  to  accompany  the  people  and  share 
their  fortunes ;  but  the  latter  expressed  a  desire  to  return  to  his 
own  kindred  {Num.  x.  29-30).  Moses  then  urged  that  from 
his  knowledge  of  the  wilderness  he  could  be  of  great  service 
as  a  guide;  and  a  subsequent  notice  suggests  that  he  finally 
consented  {/ud.  i.  16,  iv.  11).  When  the  departure  from  Sinai 
was  begun,  the  march  of  the  people  was  preceded  by  the  Ark 
of  the  Covenant  of  Jehovah,  which  went  before  them  three  days 
in  advance  to  determine  the  next  station,  its  starting  and  halting 
being  saluted  with  the  words  of  a  chant  {Num.  x.  33-36).  The 
first  movement  was  made  in  a  northerly  direction  towards  the 
wilderness  of  Paran.  The  latter  was  the  barren  region  of 
El-Tih  lying  south  of  Canaan  and  west  of  Edom,  and  seems 

^  Cf.  Deut.  x.  8  (where  at  that  time  refers  to  the  sojourn  at  Horeb,  ver.  I-5, 
not  to  the  verses  immediately  preceding),  xxxiii,  9. 

^  In  Deut.  ix.  the  combined  account  has  been  followed,  with  certain 
omissions. 

*  In  xxiv.  12  they  are  styled  tables  of  stone,  but  in  xxxiv.  i,  4  tables  of  stones. 
In  the  recapitulation  in  Deut,  v.  22  (Heb.  19),  x.  i,  this  difference  is  ignored. 


Ii8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  have  been  approached  by  the  shore  of  the  Gulf  of  Akaba. 
This  appears  from  the  fact  that  the  Israelites  are  represented, 
shortly  after  leaving  Sinai,  as  being  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
the  sea  {Num.  xi.  22,  31),  but  the  stations  mentioned  as  being 
on  the  route  cannot  be  positively  identified.  These  stations  are 
Taberah  {Nu?n.  xi.  3),^  Kibroth  Hattaavah,^  and  Hazeroth.  The 
first  two  are  described  as  owing  their  names  to  certain  incidents 
which  occurred  near  them.  At  Taberah  ("Burning")  the  people 
murmured,  and  in  consequence  the  fire  of  Jehovah  burnt  among 
them.  At  Kibroth  Hattaavah  ("  the  graves  of  lust "),  the  people 
lamented  the  want  of  flesh  to  eat,  contrasting  the  manna  upon 
which  they  now  subsisted  with  the  dainties  they  enjoyed  in 
Egypt  These  repeated  complaints  so  distressed  Moses  that 
he  pleaded  that  the  burden  laid  upon  him  was  too  heavy  for 
him.  He  was  accordingly  led  to  associate  seventy  elders  with 
him  to  share  his  responsibilities ;  ^  upon  whom  when  gathered 
at  the  Tent  of  Meeting  outside  the  camp  the  Divine  spirit 
was  bestowed,  and  they  prophesied.*  Two  others,  named  Eldad 
and  Medad,  who  were  not  among  the  seventy,  were  at  the  same 
time  endowed  with  the  spirit  of  prophecy  whilst  remaining  in 
the  camp;  whereupon  Joshua  on  hearing  of  it,  in  his  zeal  for 
his  master's  pre-eminence,  which  seemed  imperilled,  urged  Moses 
to  forbid  them,  but  the  high-souled  leader  only  expressed  his 
wish  that  Jehovah  would  put  His  spirit  upon  all  His  people. 
The  desires  of  the  multitude  for  flesh  food  were  afterwards 
gratified  by  the  providential  appearance  (seemingly  for  the  second 
time)  of  flights  of  quails,  which  were  driven  from  the  sea  towards 
the  camp.  But  reckless  indulgence,  after  long  abstinence,  brought 
disease  in  its  train;  and  great  mortahty  ensued  among  the 
people.^     Hazeroth,  the  third  of  the  places  named,  merely  means 

^  This  is  not  mentioned  in  the  list  of  stations  enumerated  in  Num.  xxxiii. 

'  In  Dent,  ix-  22  Massah  is  named  between  Taberah  and  Kibroth 
Hattaavah. 

'  This  incident  appears  to  be  quite  distinct  from  the  somewhat  similar  one 
o{  Ex.  xviii.  (p.  114). 

*  Though  the  appointment  of  the  seventy  elders  stands  in  close  relation  to 
Moses'  complaint  of  his  weight  of  responsibility,  the  story  of  their  prophesying 
has  little  bearing  upon  the  people's  demand  for  flesh. 

*  The  expression  in  Num.  xi  33  can  scarcely  be  taken  literally  (contrast 
ver.  19,  20). 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS       119 

"  encampments  " :  it  has  been  identified  by  some  with  the  Wddy 
Huderah.  Here  Miriam  and  Aaron  murmured  against  their 
brother,  partly  (it  would  seem)  because  he  had  married  a  Cushite 
woman,^  and  partly  from  jealousy  of  his  position,  contending 
that  they,  like  him,  were  recipients  of  Divine  revelations.  Moses' 
authority,  however,  was  vindicated  by  Miriam  being  attacked  by 
leprosy,  in  consequence  of  which  she  had  for  a  time  to  be 
separated  from  the  camp. 

On  entering  the  wilderness  of  Paran,  the  people  established 
themselves  at  Kadesh  (distant  eleven  days'  journey  from  Horeb, 
according  to  Deut.  i.  2).  This  place  is  usually  identified  with  Ain 
Kadis^  some  fifty  miles  south  of  Beersheba.  From  this  place 
an  entry  into  Canaan  was  contemplated ;  and  with  this  in  view, 
a  party  of  twelve  spies  ^  were  sent  to  explore  the  country  and  its 
defences.  They  reached  Hebron,  and,  as  it  was  late  summer 
{Num.  xiii.  20),  they  gathered  in  the  neighbouring  valley  of 
Eshcol  specimens  of  the  products  of  the  district,  grapes,  pome- 
granates, and  figs,  to  exhibit  to  their  countrymen  as  evidence 
of  its  fertility.  But  the  sight  of  the  inhabitants,  who  belonged 
to  the  gigantic  race  of  the  Anakim,  so  impressed  them  that  on 
their  return,  though  they  spoke  most  eulogistically  of  the  country, 
they  represented  that  its  conquest  was  impracticable  owing  to 
the  strength  of  the  towns  and  the  formidable  character  of  its 
people.  One  spy  alone,  named  Caleb,^  was  confident  of  success, 
and  urged  an  immediate  attack.  But  his  voice  was  unheeded 
amid  the  general  dismay  produced  by  the  report  of  his  com- 
panions. So  disconcerted  were  the  people  by  what  they  heard 
that  they  even  proposed  to  choose  a  captain  who  would  lead 
them  back  to  Egypt.  This  suggested  abandonment  of  what  was 
regarded  as  a  divinely-promoted  undertaking  brought  at  once 
upon  its  advocates  a  sentence  of  punishment.     Moses  sought 

^  If  Num.  xii.  i  is  to  be  reconciled  with  Ex.  ii.  21,  it  seems  simplest 
to  regard  this  as  a  second  marriage,  Zipporah  being  now  dead.  But  it  is 
possible  that  this  is  another  version  (from  E)  of  his  marriage  with  Zipporah 
(related  in  Ex.  ii.  21,  from  J).  Cushite  usually  means  "Ethiopian";  but 
there  were  certain  Arabian  tribes  whose  descent  was  traced  to  Gush  (see 
Gen.  X.  7),  and  in  Hab.  iii.  7  Cushan  is  connected  with  Midian. 

^  This  number  is  given  not  only  in  Num.  xiii.  1-17  (P),  but  in  Deut.  i.  23. 

'  Caleb,  though  described  in  Num.  xiii.  6  as  a  Judahite,  was  possibly  of 
Edomite  origin;  see  p.  174,  note. 


120  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

forgiveness  for  the  people  from  Jehovah  (Who  is  represented 
as  desiring  to  smite  them  with  a  pestilence,  and  to  make  of 
Moses  a  chosen  people),  pleading  that  their  destruction  would 
discredit  Jehovah's  power  in  the  sight  of  neighbouring  nations ; 
and  he  thus  obtained  their  pardon.  But  speaking  afterwards 
to  the  multitude  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  he  declared  that  of 
that  generation  none  but  Caleb  should  see  the  land  which  had 
been  promised  to  their  race :  they  themselves  should  die  in  the 
wilderness,  and  only  their  children  should  enter  the  country 
which,  from  motives  of  fear,  had  been  rejected.  A  revulsion 
of  feeling  immediately  seized  the  people,  and  acknowledging 
their  error,  they  professed  themselves  eager  to  set  about  the 
conquest  without  delay.  Moses  asserted  that  disaster  awaited 
them  if  they  persisted;  but  they  could  not  be  restrained.  In 
spite  of  their  leader's  protest,  and  without  being  accompanied 
by  the  Ark,  they  advanced  to  the  attack ;  but  Moses'  words  were 
verified,  and  they  were  defeated  by  the  Canaanites  and  Amalekites 
(in  Deut.  i.  44,  called  Amorites)  at  Zephath  (subsequently  named 
Hormah,y>/^.  i.  17),  a  place  some  twenty-five  miles  N.  of  Kadesh 
(now  Sebaitd). 

In  the  narrative  of  the  espial  of  Canaan  contained  in  Num.  xiii.  and  xir. 
two  accounts  are  blended,  of  which  one  is  adopted  in  the  text.  The  other, 
differing  from  this,  recites  (i)  that  the  spies,  despatched  from  the  wilder- 
ness of  Paran,  surveyed  the  whole  land  throughout  its  entire  length  fiom 
the  wilderness  of  Zin  (cf.  Nmn.  xx.  I,  xxxiii.  36)  to  Rehob  (either  the 
place  of  that  name  in  the  territory  of  Asher  {Josh.  xix.  28)  or  Beth-rehob, 
near  the  town  of  Dan,  Jud.  xviii.  28),  forty  days  being  spent  in  the  work  ; 
(2)  that  they  represented  that  the  land  was  impoverished  (with  Num.  xiii.  32, 
cf.  Lev.  xxvi.  38,  Ezek.  xxxvi.  13) ;  (3)  \}[i^t  Joshua  (who  was  one  of  them), 
as  well  as  Caleb,  brought  back  a  true  account,  and  was  with  Caleb  excepted 
from  the  sentence  of  exclusion  pronounced  upon  the  rest,  who  died  by  a 
plague  {Num.  xiv.  37).  The  review  in  Deut.  i.  22  foil,  agrees  with  the 
account  contained  in  the  text  above,  and  ignores  the  other  version. 

The  defeat  at  Zephath  (Hormah)  {Num.  xiv.  45,  Deut.  i.  44)  appears  the 
same  with  one  related  in  the  isolated  section.  Num.  xxi.  1-3,  as  having  been 
sustained  at  the  hand  of  the  king  of  Arad.  Arad  was  some  twenty  miles  E.  of 
Beersheba,  so  that  its  king  must  have  marched  southward  to  meet  the  Israelites. 
The  retribution  inflicted  by  Israel,  as  described  in  Num.  xxi.  3,  is  doubtless 
anticipatory  of  that  recorded  va.  Jud.  i.  17  (see  p.  175),  and  does  not  refer  to 
Moses'  time ;  if  it  did,  the  omission  of  the  Israelites  to  repeat  the  attempt 
to  enter  Canaan  from  the  south  would  be  unaccountable. 

Of  the  period  which  followed  the  abortive  attempt  to  enter 
Canaan,  the  history  is  obscure  in  the  extreme.  The  length 
of  time  that  elapsed  between  the  Exodus  and  the  final  invasion 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        121 

of  Canaan  is  conventionally  represented  as  forty  years  {Num.  xiv. 
34,  cf.  xxxiii.  38),  which  is  presumably  regarded  as  the  equivalent 
of  a  generation.  In  the  narrative  which  has  been  preserved  two 
or  more  records  appear  to  be  fused  together,  and  a  consistent 
account  is  practically  impossible.  It  seems  probable,  on  the 
whole,  that  Kadesh  was  the  centre  round  which  their  move- 
ments turned.  The  place  was,  as  its  name  indicates,  a  sanctuary, 
and  possessed  a  supply  of  water;  and  though  doubtless  the 
people  left  it  from  time  to  time  in  search  of  pasture  for  their 
flocks,  they  remained  in  its  neighbourhood.  It  is  possible  that 
whilst  here  they  came,  for  the  first  time  since  the  Exodus,  into 
contact  with  the  Egyptians.  An  inscription  of  the  Pharaoh 
Mernptah  has  been  found  recently,^  the  close  of  which  relates 
the  conquest  by  the  Egyptians  of  the  land  of  Canaan  and 
Ashkelon;  and  then  adds,  "The  Israelites  are  spoiled,  so  that 
they  have  no  seed ;  the  land  of  Khar  (perhaps  the  land  of  the 
Horites,  i.e.  Edom)  is  become  hke  the  widows  of  Egypt."  Of 
the  circumstances  alluded  to  nothing  positive  is  known ;  but  the 
situation  of  the  Israelites  implied  in  the  inscription  is  in  or  near 
S.  Palestine,  and  as  the  fuller  records  of  later  date  show  no  trace 
of  any  relations  between  Israel  and  Egypt  until  the  time  of 
Solomon,  the  sojourn  at  Kadesh  seems  to  be  the  only  occasion 
that  will  suit  the  conditions.^ 

The  duration  of  the  sojourn  in  Kadesh  is  nowhere  definitely  stated,  and 
the  various  passages  relating  to  it  point  to  different  conclusions.  After  the 
discontent  which  followed  upon  the  report  of  the  spies,  the  people  were 
bidden  to  turn  to  the  wilderness  by  the  way  of  the  Red  Sea,  i.e.  to  the  Gulf  of 
Akaba  {Num.  xiv.  25) ;  and  in  Deut.  i.  46  it  is  said  that  after  "many  days" 
had  been  spent  at  Kadesh  they  wandered  for  thirty-eight  years  around  the 
border  of  Edom  (ii.  i,  14).  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  affirmed  in  Num.  xx.  I, 
14,  22,  that  Kadesh,  at  the  close  of  the  forty  years'  wanderings,  was  the  starting 
point  for  the  final  march  into  Canaan ;  and  this  appears  the  most  plausible 
of  the  conflicting  representations.  For  the  view  implied  in  Nfu?n.  xxxiii. 
see  p.  125. 

Only  a  few  noteworthy  events  are  related  in  the  Pentateuch  as 
occurring  within  the  years  spent  at,  or  near,  Kadesh.  Among  these 
was  a  revolt  against  the  secular  authority  of  Moses,  organised 

^  See  Sayce,  Early  Hist.  ofHeb.,  p.  159. 

*  On  the  assumption  that  the  Exodus  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Mernptah, 
the  only  alternative  to  the  view  in  the  text  is  to  regard  the  inscription  as  a 
boastful  account  of  the  Exodus  itself,  considered  as  an  expulsion  of  the 
Israelites. 


122  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

by  three  Reubenites,  Dathan,  Abiram,  and  On,  who  contended 
that  Moses  had  brought  the  people  out  of  a  bountiful  land  into 
the  wilderness  under  false  pretences,  and  was  endeavouring  to 
make  himself  a  king  over  them.  Moses  vehemently  protested 
his  innocence  of  any  act  of  oppression,  and  bade  the  people 
separate  themselves  from  the  mutineers,  appealing  to  the  doom 
that  he  asserted  would  befall  them,  to  vindicate  his  claims  and 
his  position.  The  narrative  relates  that  his  anticipations  were 
verified,  and  that  Dathan  and  Abiram,  with  their  families,  were 
swallowed  up  by  an  earthquake  as  they  stood  at  the  door  of  their 
tents  (Num.  c.  xvi.). 

The  revolt  of  Dathan  and  Abiram  is  confused  in  Num.  xvi.  with  a 
movement  amongst  a  number  of  Levites  which  was  headed  by  Korah  ;  but 
only  the  former  appears  to  belong  to  JE,  and  is  alluded  to  in  Dent.  (xi.  6). 
Korah's  rebellion  (the  account  of  which  comes  from  P)  was  directed  against 
the  superior  religious  authority  enjoyed  by  Moses  and  Aaron  together  over 
other  Levites.  He  and  his  partisans  (250  men)  were  challenged  by  Moses 
to  approach  the  Tabernacle  and  offer  incense,  it  being  left  to  Jehovah  to 
decide  whether  they  or  Aaron  should  be  His  chosen  ministers.  They  did 
so,  and  were  destroyed  by  fire.^  The  censers  which  they  used  were  made 
into  plates  for  covering  the  altar,  to  serve  as  a  reminder  that  none  but 
members  of  the  house  of  Aaron  might  bum  incense  before  Jehovah  {Num. 
xvi.  40).  On  the  morrow,  however,  the  people  charged  Moses  and  Aaron 
with  causing  the  death  of  their  fellow-countrymen  ;  whereupon  a  plague 
broke  out  in  which  14,700  persons  perished,  and  was  only  stayed  by  Aaron 
standing  with  a  censer  of  incense  between  the  dead  and  the  Living  to  make 
atonement  {Num.  xvi.  41-50).  After  this,  to  still  such  complaints  for  the 
future,  Moses  was  bidden  to  lay  up  in  the  Tent  of  Meeting  twelve  rods,  each 
inscribed  with  the  name  of  one  of  the  tribes,  Aaron's  name  being  written  on 
the  rod  of  Levi.  The  next  morning  Aaron's  rod  was  found  to  have  borne 
almonds ;  and  as  a  token  of  Jehovah's  choice,  his  rod  was  preserved  before 
the  Testimony  {Num.  xvii.). 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  selection  (in  c.  x\4i.)  of  LevVs  rod  from  among 
those  of  the  twelve  tribes  has  little  bearing  upon  the  protest  of  the  Levite 
Korah  against  the  exclusive  privileges  of  Aaron  and  his  house,  so  that  this 
part  of  the  narrative  (c.  xvii.),  though  derived  from  P,  is  not  quite  homo- 
geneous with  the  rest.  Probably  it  belongs  to  a  version  of  the  story  which 
represented  Korah  as  championing  against  the  religious  privileges  of  Levi  the 
claims  of  the  other  tribes  (cf.  the  phrase  in  xvi.  3  all  the  congregation  are 
holy^  and  see  also  Num.  xxvii.  1-3). 

At  Kadesh  Miriam  died,  and  was  buried  there.  At  the  same 
place  another  outbreak  of  discontent  on  the  part  of  the  people 
was  produced  by  want  of  water  {Nu7n.  xx.  2  foil.).     Their  needs 

*  Korah's  sons  did  not  perish  with  their  father  {Num.  xxvi.  ii),  and  in 
the  succeeding  history  descendants  of  his  obtain  mention,  Samuel  being 
amongst  them,  according  to  /  Ch.  vi.  22  foil.    But  see  pp.  283-4. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        123 

were  again  providentially  supplied;  but  in  his  impatience  with  the 
murmurers,  Moses,  together  with  his  brother,  did  not  show 
proper  faith  in  the  God  Whose  servants  they  were,  and  (accord- 
ing to  one  account)  to  this  distrust  was  due  the  fact  that  they 
were  not  in  the  end  permitted  to  enter  the  Promised  Land 
(cf.  Deut.  xxxii.  51). 

From  the  account  as  it  stands,  it  would  appear  that  the  offence  of  Moses 
and  Aaron  consisted  in  the  lack  of  faith  in  Jehovah's  power  revealed  by  the 
former  striking  the  rock  twice  in  order  to  procure  water  (for  there  is  no 
emphasis  on  we  in  Moses'  speech,  ver.  lo),  but  the  allusion  in  ver.  24  (cf.  Num. 
xxvii.  14)  suggests  something  of  a  more  directly  rebellious  character.  To 
the  waters  which  were  forthcoming  to  supply  the  wants  of  the  discontented 
people  the  name  Meribah  was  given,  which  is  identical  with  that  bestowed 
on  the  scene  of  the  similar  incident  in  Ex.  xvii.  1-7  ;  and  it  is  possible  that 
tradition  has  preserved  two  versions  of  one  event.  ^  If  the  occurrence  took 
place  at  Kadesh,  identified  in  Gen.  xiv.  7  with  Ett-mishpat  {^' the  Spring  of 
Judgment ")  the  absence  of  water  is  curious. 

Another  explanation  of  Moses'  exclusion  from  the  land  of  Promise  is 
given  in  Deut.  i.  37  (cf  iii.  26,  iv.  21),  where  it  is  brought  into  connection 
with  the  incident  of  the  spies,  the  leader  suffering  with  the  people  for  the 
offence  of  the  latter  {for  your  sakes\  and  Joshua  being  appointed  as  his 
successor  to  effect  the  conquest. 

The  disastrous  issue  of  the  invasion  of  Canaan  from  the  south 
seems  to  have  left  a  deep  impression  upon  the  people;  so  that  even 
when  the  second  generation  had  grown  up,  and  were  prepared 
to  renew  the  attempt  to  settle  themselves  in  Canaan,  it  was  from 
the  east  and  not  from  the  south  that  they  determined  to  approach 
it.  But  between  them  and  the  east  bank  of  the  Jordan  lay 
the  countries  of  Edom  and  Moab.  To  the  king  of  Edom 
application  was  made  from  Kadesh  for  leave  to  pass  through 
his  territory.  It  was,  however,  refused;  and  consequently,  as 
the  Israelites  were  not  disposed  to  force  a  passage  against  armed 
opposition,  they  had  to  compass  Edom.  If  the  narrative  (which 
is  composite)  is  to  be  followed  as  it  stands,  Israel  before 
receiving  the  hostile  answer  of  the  Edomite  king,  had  approached 
Mt.  Hor,  which  has  been  identified  with  a  hill  called  Modcrah 
on  the  W.  border  of  Edom  some  thirty  or  forty  miles  N.E.  of 
Kadesh,  and  directly  E.  of  Zephath.2    There  Moses  lost   his 

\  Possibly  there  may  be  a  third  version,  alluded  to  in  Deut.  xxxiii.  8,  in 
which  God  is  represented  as  striving  with,  and  proving,  Levi  at  Massah  and 
Meribah,  whereas  in  Ex.  xvii.  and  Num.  xx.  the  whole  people  are  described 
as  striving  with,  and  proving,  God. 

*  Josephus  {Ant.  iv.  4,  7)  places  Mt.  Hor  near  Petra ;  but  this  was  E. 


124  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

brother  Aaron,  who  is  said  to  have  been  123  years  old  at  his 
death,  and  who  was  mourned  by  the  people  for  thirty  days.  His 
wife,  whose  name  was  Elisheba,  the  daughter  of  Amminadab, 
had  borne  him  four  sons,  Nadab,  Abihu,  Eleazar,  and  Ithamar,  of 
whom  the  two  eldest  are  related  to  have  perished  in  the  wilderness 
of  Sinai  for  offering  "strange  fire"^  before  Jehovah  {Lev.  x.  1-3, 
Num.  iii.  4) ;  and  it  was  the  third,  Eleazar,  who  succeeded  his 
father  in  the  priestly  office.  Aaron,  before  his  death,  was  taken 
to  the  top  of  Mt.  Hor,  and  there  divested  of  his  priestly  robes, 
and  Eleazar  formally  arrayed  in  them.  From  Mt.  Hor  Israel 
proceeded  southward  towards  the  Gulf  of  Akaba  in  order  to 
skirt  the  Edomite  territory  by  Elath  and  Ezion-geber  {Deut. 
ii.  8).  The  length  of  the  march  and  the  want  of  water  and 
of  an  adequate  supply  of  food  again  produced  discouragement, 
which  found  expression  in  sullen  murmurs.  The  malcontents 
were  terrified  into  a  more  submissive  frame  of  mind  by  being 
attacked  by  serpents  whose  bite  caused  a  burning  pain.^  On 
their  repenting,  Moses  prayed  for  them,  and  by  Divine  direction 
he  made  a  serpent  of  brass  which  he  raised  aloft  on  a  pole, 
towards  which  those  who  were  bitten  were  bidden  to  gaze,  in 
order  to  prove  their  faith  in  Jehovah,  whilst  recalling  their  sin. 
Those  who  obeyed  were  healed  of  the  poison.  The  remainder 
of  the  march  was  without  noteworthy  incident  They  were 
allowed,  when  they  eventually  turned  northward,  to  traverse  part 
of  the  territory  of  Edom  {Deut.  ii.  4);  and  then  proceeded 
to  compass  Moab  {Deut.  ii.  9).  The  E.  border  of  this  country 
was  reached  at  lye-abarim  {Num.  xxi.  11),  and  they  appear 
to  have  crossed  a  portion  of  it  (as  they  had  previously  done 
of  Edom),  its  inhabitants,  though  not  forward  in  offering 
provisions  (Deut.  xxiii.  3,  4),  nevertheless  selling  them  what  they 
needed  {Deut.  ii.  29).  After  camping  at  lye-abarim  the  Israehtes 
crossed  the  Zered  (either  the  IVddy  Kerak,  which  enters  the  Dead 
Sea,  or  the  Seil  es  Saideh,  an  affluent  of  the  Arnon) ;  and  finally 

of  the  Arabah  and  of  Edom,  if  not  actually  \\'ithin  the  latter  country.  Both 
Num.  XX.,  which  calls  the  scene  of  Aaron's  death  Mi.  Hor^  and  Deut.  x.  6-7 
(compared  with  Num.  xxxiii.  31-35),  which  calls  it  Moserahy  imply  that  it 
was  on  the  road  to  Ezion-geber,  W.  of  the  Arabah  and  of  Edom  (see  p.  125). 

1  See  Ex.  xxx.  9. 

■  Such  serpents  are  represented  in  Deut.  viii,  15  as  abounding  in  the  desert. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        125 


arrived  at  the  Arnon  itself  (the  modern  Wddy  Mojib)^  the  river 
which  formed  the  boundary  between  Moab  and  the  Amorites; 
and  here  they  began  to  enter  upon  their  inheritance. 

The  route  followed  by  the  Israelites  from  Kadesh  to  the  border  of  Moab 
is  difficult  to  trace,  not  only  from  the  impossibility  of  identifying  with  cer- 
tainty the  places  named,  but  also  from  the  contradictory  character  of  the 
accounts  given,  the  several  lists  of  the  stations  mentioned  between  Sinai 
and  Moab  being  as  follows: — 


/x.  ii-xiii.  26. 
'''Ixx.  22-xxi.  II. 

Num.  xxxiii. 

Deut.  X.  6-7. 

Sinai 

Sinai 

Taberah 

Kibroth-hattaavah 

Kibroth-hattaavah 

Hazeroth 

Hazeroth 

Rithmah 

Rimmon-perez 

Libnah 

Rissah 

Kehalathah 

Mt.  Shepher 

Haradah 

Makheloth 

Tahath 

Terah 

Mithkah 

Kadesh 

Hashmonah 

Moseroth 

Beeroth-bene-jaakan 

Mt.  Hor  (Aaron  died) 

Bene-jaakan 

Moserah  (Aaron  died) 

Hor-haggidgad 

Gudgodah 

Jotbathah 

Jotbathah 

(Journey  to  the  Red  Sea, 

Abronah 

at  Ezion-geber,  to  com- 

Ezion-geber 

pass  Edom) 

Zin  (Kadesh) 

Mt.  Hor  (Aaron  died) 

Zalmonah 

Punon 

Oboth 

Oboth 

lye-abarim  (border  of 

lye-abarim  (border  of 

Moab) 

Moab) 

It  will  be  observed  that  (i)  the  places  in  Deut.  correspond  (with  a  slight 
difference  in  order)  to  certain  localities  named  in  Nufn.  xxxiii.  as  on  the  road 
to  Ezion-geber,  and  that  Deut.  therefore  agrees  with  Num.  xx.  23-xxi.  4  in 
dating  Aaron's  death  before  the  arrival  at  Ezion-geber,  though  it  gives  a 
different  name  to  the  scene  of  it ;  (2)  Num.  xxxiii.  mentions  Kadesh  and 
Aaron's  death  at  Mt.  Hor  after  Ezion-geber.  It  has  been  attempted  to 
reconcile  the  discrepancy  either  by  assuming  that  Ezion-geber  and  the  places 
named  before  it  in  Num.  xxxiii.  and  Deut.  x.  were  visited  twice  (the  mention 
of  them  in  Num.  xxxiii.  relating  to  the  first  occasion,  and  that  in  Deut.  x.  to 
the  second),  or  (which  seems  preferable)  by  considering  the  reference,  in  Num. 
xxxiii.  36b-4ia,  to  Zin  (Kadesh)  and  Mt.  Hor  as  interpolated  or  misplaced. 

The  Amorites  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  were  divided  at  this  time 


126  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

into  two  kingdoms,  the  southernmost,  under  Sihon,  being  in- 
cluded between  the  Jabbok  and  the  Arnon  and  having  its  capital 
at  Heshbon,  whilst  the  other,  whose  ruler  was  Og,  comprised 
the  district  called  Bashan  (reaching  from  the  Jabbok  to  the 
slopes  of  Hermon).  Sihon  had  acquired  his  territory  at  the  cost 
of  the  Moabites  (who  had  previously  expelled  an  aboriginal  race 
called  the  Emim  {Dent.  ii.  lo)  ),the  Moabite  possessions  now  being 
confined  to  the  region  south  of  the  Arnon.  His  country  the 
Israelites  now  sought  to  traverse,  with  a  view  to  reaching  the 
Jordan.^  They  accordingly  made,  from  the  wilderness  of  Kede- 
moth  {Dcut.  ii.  26),  the  same  application  to  him  which  they  had 
previously  made  to  the  king  of  Edom,  and  met  with  the  same 
refusal.  But  the  obstacle  thus  presented  could  not  be  turned  as 
was  done  on  the  earlier  occasion;  and  between  themselves  and 
the  Amorites  there  were  none  of  the  ties  of  blood  which  had 
doubtless  made  themselves  felt  in  the  case  of  Edom.  Conse- 
quently it  was  sought  to  effect  a  passage  through  the  enemy  by 
force ;  and  Sihon  was  defeated  at  Jahaz.  The  victory  thus  gained 
was  improved  upon.  Heshbon  and  some  other  towns  were  cap- 
tured ;  the  population  expelled  or  exterminated  ;2  and  the  whole 
district  between  the  Arnon  and  the  Jabbok  stretching  eastward  as 
far  as  Jazer,^  was  placed  at  the  mercy  of  the  invaders.*     The 

^  The  stations  reached  after  lye-abarim  are  given  differently  in  Num.  xxi. 
12-20  and  xxxiii.  45-47,  and  are  as  follows: — 

Num.  xxL  Num.  xxxiiL 

Zered 
Arnon 

Beer  Dibon-gad 

Mattanah  Almon-diblathaim 

Nahaliel 
Bamoth 
Pisgah  Nebo 

The  places  in  Num.  xxi.  following  the  mention  of  the  Arnon,  and  all  the 
places  named  in  Num.  xxxiii.  45-47,  were  in  Amorite  territory,  and  the 
occurrence  of  them  in  their  present  position  in  the  former  chapter  anticipates 
the  conquest  of  Sihon  related  subsequently.  In  Num.  xxi,  19,  in  place  of 
from  the  wilderness  to  Mattanah  should  be  read  (after  the  LJOL)  from  Beer 
to  Mattanah. 

'  See  Num.  xxi.  32,  Deut.  ii.  34. 

'  This  was  the  border  of  the  chDdren  of  Ammon,  see  LXX.  of  Num, 
xxi.  24  (end). 

*  In  the  song,  quoted  in  Num.  xxi.  27-30,  in  celebration  of  the  victory 
over  Sihon  and  the  Amorites,  whose  chief  city,   Heshbon,  is  described  as 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS       127 

attractiveness  of  its  extensive  pastures  appealed  strongly  to  a 
people  which  had  spent  so  many  years  in  the  desert,  and  two  of 
the  tribes,  Reuben  and  Gad,  which  were  richest  in  cattle  and 
flocks,^  applied  to  Moses  for  leave  to  occupy  it  instead  of  seeking 
other  possessions  on  the  W.  of  Jordan.  The  Israelite  leader 
consented  on  condition  that  they  armed  themselves  to  accompany 
their  brother-tribesmen  when  they  should  cross  the  river ;  and 
these  terms  the  Reubenites  and  Gadites  undertook  to  fulfil 
i^Num,  xxxii.). 

In  Num.  xxi.  33-35,  Deut.  iH.  I-I5>  xxix.  7-8,  xxxi.  4  (cf.  Num.  xxxii. 
33-42),  Og  the  king  of  Bashan^  is  also  said  to  have  been  defeated  by  the 
Israelites  at  Edrei  (E.  of  the  sea  of  Chinnereth),  and  his  country  (comprising 
sixty  fortified  cities)  is  related  to  have  been  occupied  at  this  time,  a  share  of 
it  falling  to  half  the  tribe  of  Manasseh.  If  Israel  had  actually  penetrated  so 
far  to  the  north  on  this  occasion,  it  is  scarcely  probable  that  the  passage 
of  the  Jordan  would  have  been  effected  at  no  other  place  than  the  fords  of 
Jericho;  and  m/ud.  xi.  19-22  only  the  defeat  of  Sihon  is  alluded  to,  and  the 
borders  of  the  territory  taken  from  him  (called  in  ver.  21  all  the  land  of  the 
Amoriies)  is  described  as  extending  from  the  Arnon  to  the  Jabbok  and  from 
the  wilderness  to  the  Jordan.  It  will  be  seen  subsequently  that  there  are 
indications  that  the  country  north  of  the  Jabbok  was  really  occupied  by 
Israel  at  a  much  later  date  (cf.  Jttd.  x.  3-4). 

The  Moabites  must  have  followed  with  friendly  eyes  the  war 
waged  against  their  enemies  the  Amorites  by  Israel;  but  the 
retention  by  the  latter  of  the  territory  taken  from  Sihon  doubtless 
brought  about  a  change  of  attitude.  The  Israelites,  however, 
who,  powerful  already  by  their  numbers,  had  been  rendered  still 
more  formidable  by  their  recent  success,  appeared  too  dangerous 
a  foe  to  meet  with  purely  human  weapons,  and  Balak  the  king 
of  Moab  accordingly  sent  for  a  soothsayer  {Josh.  xiii.  ^)  or 
enchanter  named   Balaam,   from   Pethor^   near  the   Euphrates 

overthrown  and  needing  to  be  rebuilt  (ver.  27,  30),  there  is  incorporated  in 
mockery  an  Amorite  triumph  song  (ver.  28,  29),  which  records  how  in  previous 
times  the  flame  of  war  had  been  carried  by  the  Amorites  from  Heshbon  into 
Moab,  as  far  south  as  Ar.  For  that  aggression  Sihon's  present  defeat  was  a 
fitting  retribution. 

^  The  neighbouring  Moabites  also  possessed  large  numbers  of  sheep,  see 
2  Kg.  iii.  4. 

'^  In  Deut.  iii.  11  his  bedstead,  "a  bedstead  of  iron,"  nine  cubits  long  and 
four  cubits  broad,  is  stated  to  have  been  preserved  at  Rabbah  in  Ammon.  It 
has  been  suggested  that  this  was  a  sarcophagus  of  basalt,  specimens  of  which 
have  been  found  in  the  country  E.  of  the  Jordan. 

3  Pethor  has  been  identified  with  Pitru  on  the  W.  bank  of  the  Euphrates. 
In   Num.    xxii.    5   for   the  children   of  his  people   the   Vulgate   reads   the 


128  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

(cf.  Deut.  xxiii.  4),  who  was  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah  {Num.  xxil 

18),  to  cripple  his  enemies  by  pronouncing  a  curse  upon  them.^ 

Balaam,  after  some  opposition,  was  brought  to  Ar,  the  capital 

of  Moab  {Num.  xxii.   36,  cf.  xxi.   15),  and  there  shown  from 

certain  commanding  heights  the  extent  of  the  people  he  was 

required  to  curse.     But  after  directing  Balak  to  erect  altars  and 

offer  sacrifice  upon  them,  he  was  led  by  Divine  inspiration  to 

pronounce  upon  Israel,  not  a  curse  but  a  series  of   blessings. 

He  subsequently  returned  home,  and  Balak  was  left  to  encounter 

his  foes  with  Httle  hope  of  success.     The  accounts  of  the  sequel 

are  conflicting.     According  to  Num.  xxv.  1-5  the  Israelites  and 

the  Moabites  fraternised,  and  the  former  were  corrupted  by  the 

women  of  Moab,  and  seduced  to  join  in  the  worship  of  the  Baal 

of  Peor  (probably  Chemosh).^     To  avenge  the  crime  the  chief 

offenders  were  hung  or  impaled  (cf.  Deut.  iv.  3).     On  the  other 

hand,  according  to  Josh.  xxiv.  9-10,  Balak's  warlike  intentions 

towards  Israel  were  carried  out  (contrary  to  Jud.  xi.  25) ;  but 

no  details  are  given,  though  it  is  indicated  that  the  result  of  the 

war  was  as  disastrous  to  the  Moabites  as  that  of  the  previous 

campaign  had  been  to  the  Amorites. 

Of  Balaam  and  his  connection  with  Israelite  history,  tradition  has  pre- 
served more  than  one  account.  Even  the  version  which  is  followed  above 
(from  JE)  is  not  homogeneous  ;  for  in  the  narrative  of  Num.  xxii.  there  are 
obvious  repetitions  (cf.  3a  beside  3b)  and  inconsistencies  {^e.g,  in  ver.  20,  21 
Balaam  goes  with  the  princes  of  Moab  according  to  the  Divine  direction ; 
whereas  in  ver.  22  foil,  he  goes  with  two  servants  alone,  in  defiance  of  the 
Divine  will,  for  he  is  intercepted  by  an  angel  and  only  saved  from  being  slain 
through  the  intelligence  of  his  ass,  which  is  endowed  with  articulate  utterance, 
and  addresses  its  master).^  With  regard  to  Balaam's  prophecies,  it  is  question- 
able whether  in  their  present  form  they  all  date  from  the  Mosaic  period  :  the 
reference  to  an  Israelite  king  and  kingdom  (xxiv.  7,  17)  points  to  the  time 
of  the  Monarchy,  in  which  case  the  allusions  to  the  overthrow  of  Edom  and 
Moab  (ver.  17,  18)  may  have  in  view  the  disasters  which  those  countries  sus- 
tained in  the  reign  of  David.  The  section  xxiv.  20-24  seems  to  be  of  later 
origin  still,  for  Assyria  (ver.  22)  did  not  come  within  the  political  horizon  of 
Israel  until  the  9th  century  at  the  earliest.  The  predicted  captivity  of  the 
Kenites  by  the  Assyrians  may  have  been  an  incident  in  the  deportation,  by 
Tiglath  Pileser,  of  N.  Israel  (where  the  Kenites  are  placed  in  Jud.  iv.  17), 

children  of  Amnion,    pointing,    perhaps,    to   another   tradition  of  Balaam's 
origin,  which  one  of  the  constituent  sources  of  JE  may  have  followed. 

1  For  the  effect  attributed  to  a  curse  cf.  Josh.  vi.  26,  /  Kg.  xvi.  34,  2  Kg. 
ii.  24,  Zech.  v.  1-4. 

2  Cf.  Hos.  ix.  10. 

•  For  the  endowment  of  an  animal  with  speech  cf.  Hom.  //.  xix.  404  folL 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS       129 

but  the  prophecy  has  as  little  reference  to  Israel  as  it  has  to  Moab.  The 
affliction  of  Assyria  by  ships  from  Kittim  (Cyprus),  foretold  in  ver.  24,  is  quite 
obscure. 

Another  account  of  Balaam  (derived  from  P)  represents  him  as  in  league, 
not  with  the  Moabites  but  the  Midianites,  and  counselling  them  to  seduce  the 
Israelites  from  their  allegiance  to  Jehovah  by  means  of  their  women  {Num. 
XXV.  6  foil.,  xxxi.  16).  The  guilty  Israelites  were  punished  not  by  a  judgment 
inflicted  by  human  agents  (as  in  xxv.  4-5)  but  by  a  plague,  which  destroyed 
24,cxx).  Phinehas,  tke  son  of  Eleazar  the  high  priest,  distinguished  himself 
by  killing  with  his  own  hand  one  of  the  most  shameless  offenders,  a  Simeonite 
called  Zimri,  together  with  the  woman  (Cozbi  the  daughter  of  a  Midianite 
prince)  with  whom  he  was  sinning.  The  Divine  wrath  being  by  this  means 
turned  away,  Phinehas,  for  the  zeal  he  had  displayed  for  the  honour  of 
Jehovah,  had  the  priesthood  secured  to  him  in  perpetuity.^  It  is  due  to  an 
attempt  to  harmonise  these  two  accounts  of  Balaam  that  "the  elders  of 
Moab"  are  combined  with  "the  elders  of  Midian"  in  Num.  xxii.  4,  7). 

A  sequel  to  this  second  account  {Num.  c.  xxxi.)  relates  that  in  consequence 
of  the  evil  done  to  Israel  by  the  Midianites,  war  was  directed  to  be  made 
upon  them.  A  body  of  12,000  men  with  Phinehas  at  their  head,  bearing  the 
vessels  of  the  sanctuary,  was  sent  against  them,  and  slew  the  five  kings  of 
Midian,  and  all  the  males  (Balaam  being  amongst  the  slain),  burnt  their 
cities  and  encampments,  and  took  captive  all  their  women  and  children,  with 
their  flocks,  herds,  and  other  possessions,  without  losing  a  single  man  {Num. 
xxxi.  49).  When  the  army  returned  to  the  camp,  Moses  was  wroth  at  the 
indiscriminate  sparing  of  the  women  and  children,  and  directed  that  all  the 
male  children  and  all  the  married  women  should  be  put  to  death,  only  the 
unmarried  girls  being  spared.  He  further  required  that  the  Israelite  soldiers 
should  purify  themselves  from  the  defilement  they  had  contracted  from  the 
slain  on  the  battlefield ;  and  enacted  that  the  spoil  should  be  equally  divided 
between  those  who  went  out  to  battle  and  those  who  remained  behind,  and 
that  sh^  of  the  share  of  the  former  should  be  given  to  the  priests,  and  -5^0  of 
the  share  of  the  latter  should  go  to  the  Levites.  The  narrative,  which,  like 
the  one  immediately  preceding,  comes  from  P,  has  many  improbable  features; 
and  the  wholesale  destruction  of  Midian  is  inconsistent  with  the  power 
possessed  by  the  nation  in  the  time  of  the  Judges  {/ud.  vi.).  It  has  been  sug- 
gested that  one  of  the  objects  of  the  narrative  is  to  give  an  historical  setting 
(seemingly  imaginary)  to  certain  laws  relating  to  (i)  purification  after  contact 
with  the  dead,  (2)  the  distribution  of  booty  taken  in  war.^ 

The  time  at  last  came  for  an  attempt  to  be  made  to  pass  the 
Jordan  and  invade  its  western  bank.  Moses  himself  was  too  old 
to  conduct  the  people  on  this  new  and  arduous  campaign,  and 
consequently  another  leader  had  to  be  appointed.  It  was  clear 
that  for  the  work  now  to  be  accomplished  a  soldier  was  needed  ; 
and  the  choice  fell  upon  Moses'  minister  Joshua,  who  had  shown 

*  Yet  at  a  subsequent  date  Eli,  of  the  house  of  Ithamar,  was  high  priest 
(see  Josephus,  An/,  viii.  i,  3). 

^  The  principle,  here  laid  down,  of  an  equal  division  of  the  spoil  between 
those  who  went  to  battle  and  those  who  stayed  in  the  camp  is  the  same  as 
that  related  to  have  been  established  by  David  after  his  defeat  of  the  Amale- 
kites  who  had  sacked  Ziklag  (/  Sam.  xxx.  24)   ;  see  p.  239. 

K 


130  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

his  military  capacity  in  the  engagement  with  Amalek  at  Rephidim 

{Ex.  xvii.  9).    He  was  accordingly  taken  to  the  Tent  of  Meeting, 

and  was  there  formally  commissioned,  and   invested  with   the 

authority  hitherto  possessed  by  Moses  (see  Deuf.  xxxi.  14  foil, 

JVum  xxvii.  15  foil). 

According  to  the  idealising  representation  of  P  {Num.  c.  xxvi.  and  xxxiv. ), 
at  this  time  not  only  was  the  commander  chosen,  who  was  to  lead  the  host  to 
the  conquest  of  Canaan,  but  a  census  was  taken  of  the  people  with  a  view  to 
the  allotment  of  the  land,  the  boundaries  of  the  territory  to  be  divided  were 
determined,  and  a  body  of  commissioners  was  appointed  to  conduct  the 
division  between  the  tribes.  The  numbers  of  the  people  above  twenty  years 
of  age  are  represented  as  601,730,  Judah  being  the  most  numerous  tribe  and 
Simeon  the  smallest.^  The  land  to  be  distributed  is  described  as  extending 
from  Kadesh-barnea  to  the  "entering  in"  of  Hamath  (probably  the  gorge 
between  the  Lebanons  {Num.  xxxiv.  8)),'  and  from  Jordan  to  the  sea  ;  and 
within  these  frontiers  the  position  of  the  tribes  (Reuben,  Gad,  and  the  half  of 
Manasseh  being  excluded)  was  to  be  decided  by  lot,  though  the  extent  of 
their  divisions  was  to  depend  on  their  respective  numbers  {Num.  xxxiii.  54), 

Moses  now  had  death  in  contemplation ;  but  before  departing, 
he  addressed  to  the  people,  whom  he  had  so  successfully  led, 
a  final  exhortation,  in  which  he  reiterated  the  terms  of  the 
covenant  subsisting  between  them  and  Jehovah  {Deut.  xxix.  i 
foil,  xxxi.  24  foil.),  reviewed  the  past  mercies  they  had  received, 
and  foretold  the  future  which  would  be  theirs,  according  as 
they  were  faithful  or  unfaithful  to  their  God.  He  then  ascended 
from  the  plains  of  Moab  to  the  top  of  one  of  the  heights  of 
Abarim  {Num.  xxvil  12),  variously  called  Nebo  {Deut.  xxxii.  49) 
or  Pisgah  (iii.  27),  which  overlooked  the  Jordan  valley,  and 
from  which  he  could  view  the  country  beyond  on  which  he  was 
not  allowed  to  set  his  foot.  After  having  thus  seen  the  promised 
land,  he  died ;  and  was  buried  {Deut.  xxxiv.  6  marg.,  and  LXX.) 
in  the  land  of  Moab,  though  the  place  of  his  burial  soon  passed 
from  memory,  and  was  unknown  in  the  time  of  the  historian 
{Deut.  xxxiv.  6).  He  is  said  to  have  been  120  years  old  at  the 
time  of  his  death,  retaining  his  natural  vigour  to  the  last.  For 
him,  as  for  Aaron,  whom  he  followed  to  the  grave  within  a  year, 
the  Israelites  mourned  for  thirty  days. 

1  In  the  census  which,  according  to  Num.  i.,  was  taken  in  the  second  year 
after  the  Exodus  the  number  of  men  over  twenty  is  given  as  603, 500,  Judah 
being  the  most  numerous  tribe  and  Manasseh  the  least  numerous. 

^  The  "Mount  Hor"  here  mentioned  must  be  quite  distinct  from  that 
alluded  to  in  Num.  xxxiii.  37-38;  and  is  conjectured  by  some  to  mean 
Hermon. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        131 

Of  Moses'  farewell  address  to  his  people  in  the  plains  of  Moab  ^  the  book 
of  Detiterotiomy  purports  to  be  an  account  (i.  1-5,  xxix.  i).  The  historical 
situation  presented  in  it  is  intrinsically  a  probable  one,  and  there  seems  no 
reason  for  doubting  that  an  address  of  such  a  tenor  was  actually  delivered, 
and  the  memory  of  it  preserved.  The  book  itself,  however  (as  distinct  from 
the  law  it  contains),  does  not  claim  to  be  actually  written  by  Moses ;  and 
reasons  have  been  previously  given  for  regarding  it  as  the  production  of  an  age 
considerably  later  than  the  Mosaic'  But  if  composed  at  the  later  date 
suggested  in  the  Introduction,  it  nevertheless  includes  matter  derived  from 
much  earlier,  and  possibly  Mosaic,  times.  Not  only  does  it  explicitly  mention 
a  book  written  by  Moses,  but  many  of  the  laws  contained  in  it  are  a  repetition 
of  those  embraced  within  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  (attributed  to  him  in 
Ex.  xxiv.  7) ;  and  injunctions  and  allusions  occur  (such  as  those  which 
relate  to  the  future  treatment  of  the  Canaanites  and  Amalekites  (vii.  1-5, 
XX.  16-18,  XXV.  17-19)  or  imply  a  vivid  knowledge  of  Egypt  (xi.  10)),  which 
in  a  composition  of  the  date  assigned  are  explicable  only  on  the  supposition 
that  they  are  recapitulated  from  some  writing  of  early  origin  (such  as  that 
referred  to  in  Ex.  xvii.  14).  Such  early  materials,  however,  are  not,  for  the 
most  part,  reproduced  verbatim,  but  are  re-cast,  and  appear  with  all  the 
characteristic  phrases  of  the  writer  of  Deuteronomy. 

Deuteronomy  contains  two  poetical  compositions  which  are  both  attributed 
to  Moses,  but  neither  of  which  is  likely  to  be  his :  viz.  the  Song  of  c.  xxxii., 
and  the  Blessing  of  c.  xxxiii.  (i)  The  Song  implies  that  the  events  re- 
viewed (the  journey  through  the  wilderness  and  the  entry  into  a  fertile 
land  (xxxii.  10-14),  which  were  followed  by  apostasy  on  the  part  of  the 
people  (15  foil.,  21)),  were  those  of  a  distant  past  (ver.  7) ;  and  the  religious 
ideas  prevailing  in  it  are  most  consonant  with  the  teaching  of  the  later 
prophets.^  (2)  The  Blessing,  besides  mentioning  Moses  in  the  third  person 
(xxxiii.  4),  refers  to  the  conquest  as  past  (ver.  27) ;  and  its  probable  date  seems 
to  be  shortly  after  that  event  (perhaps  the  time  of  the  Judges),  when  allusion 
to  the  local  position  of  the  tribes  (19,  23)  would  be  most  natural,  when 
Judah  and  Simeon  (the  latter  not  here  mentioned)  were  severed  from  the  rest 
of  the  nation  (ver.  7),  and  when  the  tribe  of  Joseph  was  eminent  (13-17),* 
the  last  two  features  pointing  to  the  northern  tribes  as  the  place  of  its  origin. 
The  prominence  given  to  the  priestly  character  of  the  tribe  of  Levi  is  against 

^  Though  the  land  of  Moab  is  generally  represented  as  the  scene  of  the 
discourse  (see  Deut.  i.  5,  xxiv.  i),  it  is  noteworthy  that  of  the  localities  men- 
tioned in  i.  I  as  those  in  the  neighbourhood  of  which  Moses  delivered  it 
Paran,  Hazeroth,  and  Laban  (if  this  can  be  identified  with  Libnah,  Num. 
xxxiii.  20)  are  places  named  in  connection  with  the  earlier  journeys  (see  Num. 
X.  12,  xi.  35,  xxxiii.  20) ;  and  with  this  the  expression  in  the  wilderness 
{Deut.  i.  i)  agrees.  It  is  possible  therefore  that  two  distinct  subjects  have 
been  fused  into  one,  viz.  a  review  of  the  legislation  of  the  wilderness ^  and  an 
account  of  Moses'  parting  address  in  the  valley  of  the  Arabah. 

^  See  Introd.  p.  7.  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  the  incidental  references 
in  xxviii.  58,  xxix.  20,  27,  xxx.  10  to  this  book  before  the  mention,  in 
xxxi.  9,  24,  of  its  composition  is,  of  itself,  an  indication  that  the  account 
is  not  contemporary  with  the  events  recorded. 

\  e-g'  ver.  21,  27,  and  see  pp.  454-5  ;  with  ver.  39  cf.  2  Is.  xli.  4,  xliii.  10, 
xlviii.  12. 

*  The  reference  to  a  sanctuary  in  Benjamin  (xxxiii.  12)  perhaps  has  in  vie\< 
Bethel  or  Mizpah.  The  king  in  ver.  5  is  probably  Jehovah  (cf.  Num.  xxiii.  21, 
/ud.  viii.  23,  Zeph.  iii.  15). 


132  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

its  having  originated  in  the  northern  kingdom,  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  I.,  a 
period  to  which  it  is  sometimes  referred  (see  /  Kg.  xii.  31),  and  accordingly 
some  scholars  assign  it  to  the  time  of  Jeroboam  II. 

Moses  was  the  first,  and  in  some  respects  the  greatest,  of  the 
series  of  illustrious  characters  which  adorn  Hebrew  history. 
Israel  perhaps  more  than  any  other  nation  owes  its  distinction 
to  a  few  individuals.  Poorly  endowed  as  a  people  with  the 
qualities  which  lead  to  national  success,  being  gifted  with 
tenacity  and  retentiveness  rather  than  power  of  initiation,  it 
has  been  indebted  for  its  position  amongst  mankind  to  a  few 
commanding  personaHties.  Among  these  Moses  occupies  a 
foremost  place.  A  multitude  of  dispirited  serfs  he  transformed 
into  a  conquering  host.  Into  a  people  who  had  fallen  away  from 
the  religion  of  their  forefathers  he  instilled  renewed  faith  in 
a  righteous  and  holy  God,  a  faith  which  in  after-times,  in  spite 
of  numerous  corruptions  and  frequent  declensions,  was  never 
wholly  quenched.  An  undisciplined  rabble  he  accustomed  to 
habits  of  law  and  order;  and  laid  for  it  the  foundations  of 
a  system  of  civil  and  religious  jurisprudence  with  which  his  name 
became  indelibly  associated,  however  small  may  be  the  part  of 
the  existing  structure  which  was  really  completed  by  him.  When 
this  process  of  training  and  organisation  was  sufficiently  advanced 
to  make  his  countrymen  capable  warriors,  he  started  them  on 
a  career  of  conquest,  and  himself  saw  a  section  of  them  pass 
from  the  condition  of  landless  nomads  into  that  of  settlers  and 
occupiers.  And  this  work  he  accomplished  in  face  of  great 
opposition.  He  had  to  contend  with  the  cowardice  and  dis- 
content of  the  people  he  led,  with  the  antagonism  of  tribal 
leaders  like  Dathan  and  Abiram,  and  with  the  jealousy  of  his 
own  kinsfolk  Aaron  and  Miriam.  Besides  the  trials  inseparable 
from  the  desert  character  of  the  country  in  which  the  wanderings 
were  spent,  and  the  impatience  which  they  produced  in  the  mass 
of  the  people,  he  had  to  confront  more  than  one  crisis  connected 
with  the  religious  polity  he  was  engaged  in  instituting.  But  he 
rose  superior  to  all  difficulties,  all  discouragements,  and  lived  to 
bring  his  countrymen  to  the  confines  of  the  Promised  Land,  and 
to  commit  them  to  a  leader  whom  he  had  trained  to  continue 
and  crown  his  work. 


THE  EXODUS  AND  WANDERINGS        133 

The  nature  of  Moses'  religious  mission  will  be  considered 
elsewhere.  It  only  remains  to  notice  here  the  various  traits  of 
character  and  temperament  which  are  brought  to  light  in  the 
course  of  his  career.  Throughout  his  history  there  appear  in 
him  qualities  of  humility,  unselfishness,  and  single-hearted 
patriotism  which  are  by  no  means  invariable  accompaniments 
of  extraordinary  ability.  His  first  entry  upon  the  task  of  de- 
livering Israel  from  the  power  of  Pharaoh  was  marked  by  deep 
self-distrust  (Ex.  iii.  11,  iv.  10).  At  Sinai,  when  the  people 
provoked  the  Divine  anger  by  worshipping  the  golden  calf,  and 
Jehovah  is  represented  as  wishing  to  destroy  them,  that  He  might 
make  of  Moses  a  great  nation,  Moses  interceded  for  the  offenders, 
and  prayed  that  his  own  name  might  be  blotted  out  of  Jehovah's 
book  if  his  countrymen  could  not  be  forgiven  (Ex.  xxxii.  9  foil, 
JVum.  xiv.  12  foll.).^  And  again  when  his  minister  Joshua,  in 
his  jealousy  for  his  master's  honour,  wished  him  to  forbid  two 
men  who,  not  being  of  the  seventy  elders  chosen  by  Moses, 
were  nevertheless  prophesying  in  the  camp,  he  expressed  a  desire 
that  all  Jehovah's  people  might  be  prophets  and  endowed  with 
the  Divine  spirit  like  himself.  Nor  was  he  any  more  ambitious 
for  his  children  than  for  himself.  Whilst  Aaron  was  succeeded 
in  the  priesthood  by  his  son  Eleazar,  Moses'  successor  was 
Joshua,  an  Ephraimite ;  and  his  posterity  was  never  distinguished 
in  Israel.2  As  has  been  seen,  even  the  site  of  his  tomb  was 
forgotten.  His  only  memorial  was  the  people  whose  future 
greatness  he  rendered  possible,  and  of  whose  religious  and 
social  life  he  determined  the  direction  for  centuries  to  come. 

^  Passages  like  these  may  be  regarded  as  expressing  doubts  which  arose  in 
Moses'  mind  as  to  the  expediency  of  seeking  any  longer  to  tr.iin  the  Israelite 
community  as  a  whole  in  the  service  of  Jehovah,  instead  of  gathering  round 
him  an  independent  body  of  followers  better  calculated  to  secure  the  result  he 
desired  (cf.  Bennett  in  Hastings'  Dt'ci.  Bib. ,  iii.  446). 

^  ScQ/ud.  xviii.  30,  i  Ch.  xxiii.  16,  17,  xxiv.  24,  xxvi.  25-28. 


CHAPTER  V 
RELIGION   IN  THE   MOSAIC   AGE 

OF  the  Mosaic  legislation  four  accounts  are  preserved.  The 
first  two,  which  are  contained  in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  and  xxxiv. 
11-26  respectively,  are  substantially  one,  and  ought  to  agree 
even  more  closely  than  they  do,  for  the  latter,  professing  to  give 
what  was  WTitten  upon  the  second  tables  of  stone  after  the  inci- 
dent of  the  Golden  Calf  (see  xxxiv.  i),  might  be  expected  to 
repeat  the  ten  "  words  "  of  the  first  pair  of  tables  contained  in 
£x.  XX.  1-17.  But  in  reality  only  the  first  two  and  the  fourth 
"words"  of  the  earlier  tables  are  reproduced  (xxxiv.  14,  17,  21), 
the  rest  of  the  injunctions  in  c.  xxxiv.  being  nearly  identical  with 
certain  of  the  ceremonial  laws  comprised  in  c.  xx.-xxiii.  The 
third  account  is  contained  in  Deuterono?ny,  and  purports  to  be 
a  review  and  repetition,  at  the  close  of  the  Wanderings,  of  the 
laws  enacted  at  the  beginning.  This,  in  the  main,  is  an  ex- 
pansion of  the  legislation  of  Ex,  xx,-xxiii.,  but  includes  many 
important  departures  from  it,  some  of  these  being,  however, 
prima  facie  explicable  as  due  to  the  difi"erence  in  the  situation 
of  the  people,  who  were  then  about  to  enter  the  Promised  Land. 
The  fourth  account  is  that  which  extends  over  the  greater  part  of 
the  books  of  Exodus^  Leviticus,  and  Numbers  (more  exactly, 
Ex.  xxv.-xxxi.,  XXXV. -xl. — which  describe  the  execution  of  the 
directions  given  in  the  preceding  section — Leviticus,  Num.  i.  i- 
x.  28,  XV.,  xvii.-xix.,  xxvi.-xxxi.,  xxxiii.-xxxvi.),  and  is  derived 
from  P.  This,  besides  containing  much  that  has  no  place  in  the 
others,  diverges  from  them  in  a  large  number  of  particulars  ;  and 
in  general  presents  the  religious  organisation  of  the  Mosaic  age 
in  a  very  different  light  from  that  in  which  it  appears  in  Ex.  xx.- 
xxiii.  or  xxxiv.     Unlike  Deuteronomy  the  bulk  of  this  body  of 

134 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        135 

laws  is  represented  as  belonging  to  the  same  period  as  the  legisla- 
tion of  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.,  so  that  the  differences  observable  cannot 
easily  be  explained  as  due  to  corrections  and  modifications 
suggested  by  Moses'  own  experience.  It  is  therefore  necessary 
in  attempting  an  account  of  the  legislation  of  Moses  to  make 
a  choice  between  these  discrepant  codes;  and  as  agreeing  best 
with  the  conditions  of  the  time,  that  of  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  (termed  in 
xxiv.  7,  "  the  book  of  the  covenant "),  which,  as  has  been  said,  is 
in  part  duplicated  in  Ex.  xxxiv.  11-26  (both  being  from  JE),^ 
seems  to  have  the  most  claim  to  be  considered  earliest  in  date, 
and  probably  in  substance  of  Mosaic  origin.  This  conclusion  is, 
for  the  most  part,  confirmed  by  the  testimony  furnished  by  the 
period  immediately  following  the  age  of  Moses,  the  practice  of 
which  (so  far  as  is  recorded)  agrees  generally  with  the  group  of 
laws  here  mentioned.  In  the  history  of  the  Judges  and  the  early 
Kings  the  regulations  of  P  (as  has  been  stated  in  the  Introduc- 
tion) are  ignored  under  circumstances  which  suggest  that  they 
were  unknown.  The  inference  in  the  abstract  is,  it  is  true,  some- 
what precarious.  Neither  silence  respecting  some  regulations  nor 
the  recorded  violation  of  others  necessarily  involves  their  non- 
existence; for,  on  the  one  hand,  reasons  for  noticing  them  may 
not  have  arisen,  and  on  the  other  hand,  the  infraction  of  known 
laws  is  a  familiar  occurrence.^  But  the  argument  has  a  force,  when 
used  in  corroboration  of  another,  which  it  may  not  possess  if 
urged  by  itself,  and  where  discrepancies  subsist  between  different 
codes  of  laws,  the  negative  evidence  of  later  history  is  of  con- 
siderable weight.  The  laws,  however,  which  are  contained  in 
Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  and  xxxiv.  11-26  are  not  exhaustive,  and  many 
questions  must  have  required  for  their  determination  ordinances 
similar  to,  if  not  identical  with,  those  included  in  the  books  of 
Leviticus  and  Numbers,  but  which  find  no  place  in  the  chapters 
of  Exodus  just  named.  Such  questions,  for  instance,  as  those 
relating  to  marriage  and  the  practice  of  sacrifice  are  likely  to 
have  occupied  much  attention  in  early  times.  In  regard  to 
sacrificial  laws,  indeed,  it  has  been  argued  that  prophets  like 

^  More  precisely,  Ex,  xx.-xxiii.  is  assigned  to  E,  xxxiv.  I-28  to  J. 
2  For  instance,  cf.  Neh.  x.  31  with  Ex.  xxiii.  10-13,  yijr.  xxxiv.  11   with 
Ex.  xxi.  2. 


136  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Amos  (v.  25)  and  Jeremiah  (vii.  22)  imply  that  there  was  little 
sacrifice  in  the  wilderness;  but  their  language  is  obviously 
rhetorical  rather  than  historical,^  and  many  of  the  ceremonial 
enactments  of  Leviticus  bear  their  early  character  upon  their  face. 
It  is  nevertheless  impossible  to  decide  positively  how  large  a  part 
of  them  go  back  to  Mosaic  times ;  and  there  is  room  for  un- 
certainty even  in  regard  to  the  laws  of  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  Portions 
of  this  code  (as  will  be  seen)  are  scarcely  appropriate  to  the 
circumstances  under  which  it  is  described  as  being  enacted,  for 
though,  no  doubt,  an  early  advance  upon  Canaan  was  in  con- 
templation, directions  are  included  implying  settled  abodes 
(xxi.  6)  and  agricultural  operations  (xxii.  5-6,  xxiii.  10),  without 
any  indication  that  they  are  intended  to  meet  future  and  not 
immediate  needs.  Part  of  what  is  related  to  have  been  enjoined 
when  Israel  was  at  the  foot  of  Mt  Sinai  leaves  the  impression  of 
having  been  laid  down  on  later  occasions;'^  but  all  is  here 
brought  under  review  at  a  single  coup  cTcEiL  And  this  arrange- 
ment, by  which  there  have  been  included  in  the  Sinaitic  legisla- 
tion laws  which,  by  their  discrepancies  with  the  (presumably) 
genuine  enactments  of  Moses,  appear  to  be  the  product  of  much 
later  times,  is,  though  historically  defective,  yet  not  without 
a  certain  justification.  The  work  of  Moses  lay  at  the  root  of  all 
Hebrew  legislation;  and  it  is  intelligible  that  ordinances  subse- 
quently established  should  have  been,  for  the  purpose  of  a 
general  survey,  amalgamated  with  previous  provisions  without 
any  distinction  being  drawn  between  what  proceeded  from  Moses 
himself  and  what  was  a  later  development  of  his  principles. 
Such  a  fusion  would  be  furthered,  if  not  rendered  almost  in. 
evitable,  by  the  process  whereby  a  system  of  law  actually  came 
into  existence  amongst  the  eariy  Israelites.  In  Ex.  xviii.  13  foil., 
one  of  the  sources  of  the  statutes  and  the  laws  taught  by  Moses 
to  his  people  is  shown  to  be  the  oral  decisions  given  by  Moses  in 
settlement  of  causes  brought  from  time  to  time  before  him. 
Such  decisions  would  doubtless  come  to  form  a  body  of  pre- 
cedents which  were  followed  more  or  less  closely  by  priests  and 

1  Cf.  pp.  425-6. 

2  Tlie  law  regulating  the  division  of  booty,  which  in  Num.  xxxi.  25  foil, 
is  ascribed  to  Moses,  is  in  /  Sam.  xxx.  24  foil,  actually  attributed  to  David ; 
see  p.  239,  and  cf.  Budde,  Religion  of  Israel  to  the  Exile,  p.  32. 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        137 

judges  at  subsequent  periods.  In  this  way  a  nucleus  of  Mosaic 
legislation  would  become  expanded,  the  accretions  no  less  than 
the  core  passing  current  under  the  name  of  the  great  lawgiver.^ 

As  will  have  been  gathered  from  what  has  just  been  said,  there 
was  at  first  no  separation  between  the  legislative  and  judicial 
organs.  The  judges  not  only  laid  down  the  principles  of  justice 
but  determined  questions  of  fact  {Ex.  xxii.  8).  Nor  was  there 
any  regularly  constituted  executive  body;  and  what  means  the 
judges  had  of  enforcing  their  decisions  are  unknown.  In  cases 
of  homicide  much  was  left  to  the  initiative  of  the  kinsmen  of 
the  individual  wronged  (see  2  Sam.  xiv.  7),  and  presumably  in 
other  instances  the  community  carried  out  the  sentence  (see 
Deut.  xvii.  7). 

The  legislation  of  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  opens  with  the  Decalogue. 
Of  the  X.  "  words  "  of  which  it  consists,  i.-iv.  relate  to  religious, 
and  v.-x.  to  social,  duties.     The  injunctions  comprise : — 
i.  The  exclusive  service  of  Jehovah. 
ii.  The  prohibition  of  the  use  of  images  in  worship, 
iii.  The  prohibition  of  a  "  vain  "  use  of  Jehovah's  name, 
iv.  The  observance  of  the  Sabbath  as  holy. 
V.  The  honouring  of  parents, 
vi.  The  prohibition  of  murder, 
vii.  The  prohibition  of  adultery, 
viii.  The  prohibition  of  theft. 
ix.  The  prohibition  of  false-witness. 
X.  The  prohibition  of  covetousness. 

In  Deut.  V.  7  foil,  the  Decalogue  is  repeated,  but  in  the  fourth  "word" 
the  motive  for  observing  it  (ver.  15)  is  different  from  that  given  in  Ex.  xx.  ii. 
In  the  latter,  the  injunction  to  rest  on  the  Sabbath  is  based  on  what  is  re- 
corded of  God  at  the  Creation;  but  in  the  former  it  is  brought  into  connection 
M'ith  Israel's  sojourn  in  Egypt  and  deliverance  from  its  bondage,  the  servitude 
undergone  there  being  a  reason  for  allowing  to  all  servants  a  day  of  rest. 
This  variation  in  the  reason  annexed,  together  with  the  absence  of  reasons 
in  the  case  of  the  majority  of  the  other  "words,"  has  suggested  that  ii.,  iii., 
iv.,  and  v.  originally  existed  in  a  briefer  form  than  they  do  at  present. 

As  has  been  already  observed,  c.  xxxiv.  also  contains  a  Decalogue  (see  ver. 
28),  but  its  provisions  admit  of  being  arranged  in  more  than  one  way.  The 
following  seems  the  simplest : — 

^  It  is  not  improbable  that  the  body  of  legislation  ascribed  to  Solon  and 
Lycurgus  came  into  existence  by  a  parallel  process. 


138  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

i.  The  exclusive  worship  of  Jehovah. 
ii.  The  prohibition  of  molten  images. 
iii.  The  observance  of  the  feast  of  Unleavened  Bread, 
iv.  The  dedication  to  Jehovah  of  the  firstborn  male  of  men  and  cattle. 
V.  The  observance  of  the  Sabbath. 

vi.  The  observance  of  the  Feast  of  First-fruits  or  Weeks, 
vii.  The  observance  of  the  Feast  of  Ingathering. 

viii.  The  prohibition  of  the  use  of  leavened  bread  with  the  blood  of  the 
sacrifice  (the  Passover),  and  of  the  keeping  of  the  sacrifice  till 
the  morning. 
ix.  The  dedication  to  Jehovah  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  soil. 
X.  The  prohibition  of  the  practice  of  seething  a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk.* 
By  some  it  has  been  claimed  that  this  Decalogue  is  of  a  more  archaic 
character  than  the  preceding  and  better-known  one — partly  on  the  ground 
that  the  tenth  "word"  of  the  latter,  with  its  prohibition,  not  of  an  outward 
act  but  of  an  inward  disposition,  belongs  to  a  higher  stage  of  ethical  con- 
sciousness than  is  likely  to  have  prevailed  in  the  Mosaic  age.     On  the  other 
hand,  the  relative  positions  in  this  tenth  "word"  of  the  "house"  and  the 
"wife"  points  to  a  primitive  phase  of  thought.^     It  is  noticeable  that  both 
Decalogues  direct  the   exclusive  worship   of  Jehovah,    prohibit   the    use   of 
images,  and  enjoin  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath. 

The  commandments  of  the  Decalogue  are  supplemented  by 
a  number  of  more  precise  enactments,  which  may  be  most  con- 
veniently considered  under  various  heads,  arranged  in  two 
divisions,  according  as  they  relate  to 

I.  Religious,  II.  Social  requirements. 

Those  contained  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  form  the  basis  of 
the  following  accounts,  the  additions  and  modifications  furnished 
by  the  other  two  codes  being  subjoined  after  each  paragraph  for 
the  purpose  of  comparison. 

I.  The  laws  regulating  religious  observances  determine  (i.)  the 
object,  (ii.)  the  manner,  of  worship. 

(i.)  The  first  "word"  of  the  Decalogue  requires,  as  has  been 
seen,  the  exclusive  service  of  Jehovah  (cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  13,  xxiv.  14) 
and  this  is  enforced  by  the  command  to  "  devote  "  any  one  who 
sacrifices  to  another  god  {Ex.  xxii.  20,  cf.  Deut.  xiii.  12-18). 
A  special  caution  is  added  against  serving  the  gods  of  the 
Canaanites,  whose  images  are  to  be  utterly  overthrown,  their 
pillars  broken  in  pieces,  and  their  Asherim  cut  down  (xxiii.  24, 
xxxiv.  12,  cf.  Deut.  vii.  5,  xii.  3);  and  to  guard  against  the 
temptation  to  idolatry  which  intercourse  with  these  nations 
might  present,  the  making  of  all  covenants  with  them  is  strictly 
forbidden  {Ex,  xxiii.  32,  xxxiv.  12-16,  cf.  Deut.  vii.  2-3). 
*  See  note  on  p.  158.  '  Contrast  Deut.  v.  21. 


RELIGION   IN  THE   MOSAIC  AGE        139 

Sorcery,  which  was  the  art  of  acquiring  knowledge  or  power 
through  illicit  supernatural  means,  was  a  breach  of  the  spirit  of 
the  injunction  here  considered ;  and  accordingly  a  sorceress  was 
to  be  put  to  death  {I!x.  xxii.  18,  cf.  Zfv.  xx.  27). 

The  command,  contained  in  the  third  "word"  of  the  Deca- 
logue, against  taking  Jehovah's  name  "  in  vain  "  probably  relates, 
in  the  first  place,  to  false  swearing  (cf.  Lev.  xix.  12  and  Jos,  An/. 
i"-  5>  5)}  but  it  also  has  in  view  irreverent  and  blasphemous 
language  (cf.  Zev.  xxiv.  10-23).  As  judges  and  rulers  were 
regarded  as  the  representatives  of  the  Deity  {Ex.  xviii.  15, 
xxii.  8-9),  insults  to  such  were  also  prohibited  (Ex.  xxii.  28). 

The  prohibition  against  the  worship  of  other  gods  than  Jehovah  is  especi- 
ally emphasised  in  Deui.  (see  vi.  14,  viii.  19,  xi.  16-17)  5  and  with  a  view 
further  to  safeguard  the  nation  against  the  seductions  of  foreign  rites  of 
worship,  express  directions  are  given  to  "devote"  the  Canaanites  (vii.  1-3, 
XX.  16-18).  The  practice  of  "devoting"  to  a  deity  the  worshippers  of  a 
rival  deity  was  followed  by  several  Semitic  races.  The  expression  is  put  into 
the  mouth  of  an  Assyrian  in  2  Kg.  xix.  1 1  ;  and  Mesha,  king  of  Moab,  like- 
wise speaks  of  "devoting"  the  inhabitants  of  the  Israelite  town  of  Nebo  to 
Ashtar  Chemosh  (see  App.  B).  In  strictness  "to  devote"  meant  to  sepa- 
rate from  common,  and  consecrate  to  Divine,  use  (see  Lev.  xxvii.  28) ;  but  in 
practice  a  "devoted"  person  was  put  to  death  (see  ver.  29).  The  devotion 
of  a  city  or  district  involved  the  total  destruction  of  all  the  human  beings ; 
but  XhQ  property,  though  sometimes  destroyed  [Deut.  xiii.  16,  Josh.  vi.  21, 
I  Sam.  XV.  3)  was,  at  other  times,  appropriated  as  spoil  {Deui.  ii.  34-35, 
Josh,  viiL  2,  27). 

(ii.)  In  the  conduct  of  the  worship  of  Jehovah  all  use  of 
material  images  (as  has  been  seen)  was  forbidden;  but  this 
prohibition  was  not  held  to  be  inconsistent  with  an  outward 
symbol  of  Jehovah's  presence.  This  was  the  Ark^  of  the 
Covenant  containing  the  two  tables  of  the  Decalogue.  When 
it  was  carried  in  front  of,  or  brought  back  to,  the  camp,  Jehovah 
was  thought  to  advance  before,  or  return  to.  His  people  {Num.  x. 
35-36,  cf.  2  Sam.  vi.  14-16);  and  under  ordinary  circumstances 
it  accompanied  the  host  to  battle  {Num.  xiv.  44,  cf.  i  Sam.  iv.  3 
foil.,  and  perhaps  2  Sam.  xi.  ii).^  It  seems  to  have  been  a  chest 
adorned  with  figures  of  c/urubim^  upon  or  between  which  Jehovah 

^  The  same  term  is  used  of  the  chest  or  coffin  in  which  the  bones  of 
Joseph  v.ere  placed  {Gen.  1.  26),  and  of  the  box  made  to  receive  contributions 
for  the  :  epair  of  the  Temple  in  the  reign  of  Joash  {2  Kg.  xii.  10).  The  word 
employed  for  Noah's  Ark  is  different. 

^  Similarly  the  Philistines  took  into  battle  the  images  of  their  gods 
(2  Sam.  V.  21). 


140  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

was  believed  to  sit  (/  Sam.  iv.  4,  2  Sam.  vi.  2).  Similar  chests 
or  coffers  are  said  to  have  had  a  place  in  Babylonian  worship; 
and  the  cherubim  (as  has  been  previously  pointed  out)  have 
their  analogues  in  Babylonian  sculptures. 

The  usual  situation  of  the  Ark  was  in  a  tent  or  tabernacle 
pitched  outside  the  camp,  in  charge  of  Joshua,  Moses'  minister. 
To  this  tent  Moses  withdrew  whenever  he  sought  the  presence 
of  Jehovah ;  and  hence  it  was  termed  the  Tent  of  Meeting 
{Ex.  xxxiii.  7-1 1 ).  At  its  entrance  the  pillar  of  cloud,  ^  which 
was  believed  to  symbolise  the  visible  descent  of  Jehovah 
to  hold  converse  with  His  people,  is  related  to  have  stood 
whenever  God  spake  with  Moses  {Ex.  xxxiii.  9,  Num.  xi.  25, 
xii.  5).  It  may  therefore  be  presumed  that  near  it  sacrifice 
was  offered  during  the  period  spent  in  the  wilderness.  But 
though  on  the  march  the  place  where  the  Tabernacle  was 
successively  pitched  would  naturally  be  the  sole  seat  of  worship 
for  the  encampment,  the  earliest  direction  regulating  the  places 
of  worship  {Ex.  xx.  24)  does  not  appear  to  restrict  them  to  the 
successive  sites  of  the  Tabernacle.  The  words  "  In  every  place 
where  I  record  my  name  I  will  come  unto  thee  and  I  will  bless 
thee"  do  not  seem  to  have  in  view  the  movements  of  the  Ark 
and  its  Tent,  but  such  places  as  had  become  associated  with 
Jehovah's  name  in  consequence  of  some  manifestation  of  Divine 
power.  This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  subsequent  history.  In 
the  books  of  Joshua  and  Samuel  numerous  localities  are  men- 
tioned where  altars  were  erected  and  worship  conducted,  in 
addition  to  that  in  which  the  Tabernacle  was  situated,  and  which 
was,  no  doubt,  the  principal  centre  of  the  nation's  devotions.^ 

Altars  were  to  be  erected  of  earth,  or,  if  stone  were  used,  it 
was  to  be  unhewn,  and  without  steps.  The  first  two  conditions 
probably  reflect  ancient  habits  of  thought  Earth  or  stone  taken 
just  as  it  was  from  the  soil  where  the  Deity  had  revealed  His 
presence  was  not  unnaturally  counted  most  suitable  to  be  used 
in  His  worship  (cf.  2  Kg.  v.  17);  whilst  the  prohibition  of  the 

^  In  Ex.  xiii.  21,  Num.  xiv.  14  the  pillar  of  cloud  is  represented  as  going 
before  the  people  on  their  march ;  in  Ex.  xL  36,  Num.  ix.  15-23  (P)  its 
resting  upon,  or  removal  from,  the  Tabernacle  (regarded  as  in  the  middle  of 
the  camp)  is  the  signal  for  ending  or  beginning  a  journey. 

2  See  p.  281. 


RELIGION   IN  THE   MOSAIC   AGE        141 

use  of  iron  possibly  goes  back  to  the  time  when  gods  were 
believed  to  dwell  in  natural  boulders,  and  might  be  injured  or 
offended  if  any  tool  were  used  to  shape  them  (of.  i  Kg.  vi.  7). 
The  employment  of  steps  as  an  approach  to  the  altar  was  dis- 
allowed in  order  to  prevent  the  exposure  of  the  lower  limbs  of 
the  officiating  priest.  Nothing  is  expressly  stated  respecting  the 
lawfulness  or  unlawfulness  of  Asherim,  or  pillars,  beside  Jehovah's 
altars ;  but  it  may  be  concluded  that  they  were  not  at  this  time 
illegitimate,  since  in  Ex.  xxiv.  4  it  is  related  that  pillars  were 
erected  near  the  altar  built  at  the  foot  of  Horeb  by  Moses 
himself. 

In  Deut.  it  is  likewise  directed  that  altars  are  to  be  built  of  unhewn  stone 
(xxvii.  5,  6),  and  it  seems  to  be  implied  (xii.  8)  that  worship  in  the  Wilderness 
was  unrestricted  as  regards  locality  (this  probably  reflecting  the  uniform  usage 
from  the  age  of  Moses  to  the  writer's  own  time).  But  it  is  enjoined  that 
as  soon  as  Canaan  is  occupied,  a  single  sanctuary  alone  is  to  be  recognised,  to 
which  the  whole  nation  is  to  resort  (xii.  5),  and  at  which  all  religious  feasts 
are  to  be  held  and  all  offerings  made  (ver.  6-18,  xiv.  22-26,  xvi.  16).  Asherim 
and  pillars  are  explicitly  prohibited  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Jehovah's  altars 
(xvi.  21,  22). 

The  Priestly  code,  however,  professedly  legislating  for  the  camp-life  of  the 
people,  directs  all  sacrifice  during  this  period  to  be  offered  at  the  Tent  of 
Meeting  {Lev.  xvii.  1-9),  which  is  regarded  as  situated  in  the  middle  of  the 
encampment  {Ntim.  ii.  17).  Of  the  structure  and  contents  of  the  Tent 
(the  pattern  of  which  is  said  to  have  been  shown  to  Moses  by  God  Himself, 
Ex.  XXV.  9)  a  detailed  description  is  furnished.  It  consisted  of  a  Tabernacle 
(the  front  of  which  faced  eastward)  made  of  acacia  wood,  30  cubits  long, 
probably  10  cubits  broad,  and  10  cubits  high  {Ex  xxvi.  15-30),  protected  by 
(i)  embroidered  Unen  curtains,  (2)  above  these,  curtains  of  goats'  hair, 
(3)  over  all,  a  covering  of  rams'  skins  (dyed  red)  and  seals'  skins  (ver.  I-I4). 
It  was  divided  into  a  Most  Holy  Place  (10  x  10  x  10  cubits)  and  a  Holy  Place 
(20  X  10  X  10  cubits),  separated  by  a  veil  (xxvi.  31-33) ;  and  was  surrounded 
by  an  uncovered  court  (100x50  cubits),  the  sides  of  which  were  formed 
by  linen  curtains  hanging  from  brazen  pillars  5  cubits  high  (xxvii.  9-19).  The 
Most  Holy  Place  (which  was  only  entered  by  the  High  Priest  once  a  year),^ 
-- 'Htained  the  Ark  (described  as  made  of  acacia  wood,  overlaid  with  gold, 
<\\y.\\  cubits ;  with  a  mercy-seat,  or  lid  of  pure  gold,  above  which,  and 
ming  part  of  it,  were  the  two  golden  cherubim,  facing  each  other  with 
xpanded  wings)  (xxv.  10-22).    In  the  Holy  Place  were  situated  (i)  a  candle- 

ick  or  lamp-stand  of  gold,  with  six  branches  parting  from  a  central  shaft, 

le  seven  lamps  of  which  were  continually  lighted,  (2)  a  table  of  acacia  wood, 
overlaid  with  gold  (2x1x1^  cubits),  on  which  Shewbread  was  arranged 
every  successive  Sabbath  {Lev.  xxiv.  8),  (3)  an  altar  of  acacia  wood,  like- 
wise overlaid  with  gold  (1x1x2  cubits)  for  burning  incense  ^  {Ex.  xxv.  23-40, 

*  See  p.  149. 

*  The  expression  before  the  ark  in  Ex.  xl.  5  must  mean  "before  the  veil** 
{Ex.  XXX.  6,  xl.  26).  The  altar  of  incense  is  not  mentioned  among  the 
contents  of  the  Holy  Place  in  Ex.  xxvi.  35. 


142  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

XXX.  i-io).  In  the  outer  court  were  placed  (i)  an  altar  of  acacia  wood,  cased 
with  brass  (5x5x3  cubits),  for  burnt  offerings,^  (2)  a  brazen  laver,  for  the  use 
of  the  sacrificers  (xxvii,  1-8,  xxx.  17-21).  From  this  account  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  Priestly  code  recognised  two  altars,  the  materials  of  neither  corre- 
sponding to  those  mentioned  in  Ex.  xx.  24,  25.  The  construction  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  all  its  belongings  is  related  to  have  been  committed  to  two  men, 
Bezalel  of  the  tribe  of  Judah,  and  Aholiab  of  the  tribe  of  Dan  (xxxi.  i-ii), 
the  materials  being  furnished  partly  out  of  free-will  offerings,  and  partly  out 
of  the  proceeds  of  a  tax  of  half  a  shekel  levied  on  every  man  above  the 
age  of  twenty. 

The  description  of  the  Tabernacle  here  given  is  no  doubt  much  exaggerated, 
and  in  this  respect  unhistorical ;  but  that  costly  materials  may  have  been 
employed  on  it  and  its  furniture  is  not  impossible  in  view  of  the  possession  by 
the  Israelites  of  golden  ornaments  {Ex.  xxxii.  3,  xxxiii.  4-6)  and  other 
valuables  {Ex.  xii.  35).  Similar  treasures  were  found  amongst  wandering 
Ishmaelites  at  a  subsequent  period  {Jud.  viii.  24). 

The  charge  of  the  Altar  and  its  service  was  committed  to 
Priests.  The  existence  of  priests  is  recognised  in  Ex.  xix.  22 
foil.  ;  but  in  the  earhest  code  there  are  no  explicit  directions 
as  to  the  class  from  which  they  were  to  be  chosen.  When  the 
covenant  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  was  made  at  the  foot 
of  Sinai,  "  young  men  of  the  children  of  Israel "  indiscriminately 
are  related  to  have  been  sent  by  Moses  to  offer  burnt  offerings 
and  peace  offerings  {Ex.  xxiv.  5) ;  but  it  seems  to  be  implied  in 
Ex.  xxxii.  26-29  (cf.  Deut.  x.  8,  xxxiii.  9-10)  that  on  the 
occasion  of  the  idolatry  of  the  Golden  Calf  shortly  afterwards, 
the  tribe  of  Levi  won  for  itself  special  privileges  in  connection 
with  Jehovah's  service.^  Both  Moses  and  Aaron  were  Levites; 
at  Sinai  Moses  took  part  in  the  sacrifice,  alluded  to  above 
{Ex.  xxiv.  6-8);  Aaron,  and  after  him,  his  son  Eleazar,  ministered 
before  the  Ark  {Deut.  x.  6) ;  and  in  the  subsequent  history  not 
only  are  Levites  generally  found  to  be  preferred  for  the  priest- 
hood {Jud.  xvii.  7-13),  but  descendants  of  Aaron  discharged  the 
office  at  the  principal  sanctuaries.  But  the  priesthood  does  not 
appear  to  have  been  at  once  restricted  to  Levites;  and  in  any 
case  there  was  no  exclusion  of  non-Levites  from  the  Tent  of 

1  The  altar  was  hollow  within,  and  was  perhaps  intended  to  be  filled 
with  earth. 

2  On  the  other  hand,  in  /  Sam.  ii.  27-28,  it  seems  to  be  implied  that  the 
selection  of  Levi  for  the  priesthood  goes  back  to  the  time  of  the  sojourn  in 
Egypt ;  and  if  the  suggestion  (mentioned  on  p.  284)  be  correct  that  the 
term  Levite  had  come  to  be  used  in  a  merely  professional  sense  as  early  as 
the  second  generation  after  Moses  (see  Jud.  xvii.  7,  xviii.  30),  the  sacerdotal 
character  of  the  tribe  must  go  back  to  a  pre-Mosaic  date. 


RELIGION   IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        143 

Meeting,  where  Moses'  constant  attendant  was  Joshua,  an 
Ephraimite  {Ex.  xxxiii.   11). 

Of  the  earliest  ceremonies  connected  with  the  consecration  of 
priests,  nothing  is  known.  It  has  been  argued  from  Jud.  xvii. 
10-12,  xviii.  4  that  the  phrase  "to  consecrate,"  which  is  Uterally 
"to  fill  the  hand,"  originally  referred  to  the  payment  of  money 
by  which  the  priest's  services  were  hired ;  but  such  an  explana- 
tion does  not  suit  cases  of  j^^consecration  {Ex.  xxxii.  29, 
I  Ch.  xxix.  5).  The  expression  may  possibly  have  arisen  from 
the  priest,  at  his  initiation,  receiving  or  taking  into  his  hand 
certain  of  the  objects  associated  with  his  office  (cf.  Lev.  viii.  22, 
27).  The  usual  priestly  robe  was  a  linen  ephod  (cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  28, 
xxii.  18). 

Attendance  at  the  altar  was  not  the  only  duty  required  of 
priests.  Recourse  was  had  to  them  for  the  settlement  of 
judicial  questions  (Eli  the  high  priest  was  Judge,  i  Saf?t.  iv.  18, 
cf.  also  Deut.  xxxiii.  10  of  the  Levites),  and  for  the  ascertain- 
ment of  the  Divine  will.  For  the  latter  purpose  use  was  made 
of  the  Urim  and  Thummim  (see  i  Sam.  xxviii.  6,  cf.  Nu7ti. 
xxvii.  21  (P)),  the  nature  of  which  is  obscure.  The  reading 
of  the  LXX.  in  i  Sam.  xiv.  41  suggests  that  they  were  lots 
(perhaps  precious  stones)  which  were  contained  in  a  pocket  of 
the  ephod  worn  by  the  principal  priest,^  and  that  the  response 
to  inquiries  varied  according  as  one  or  other  came  to  light  when 
the  pocket  was  shaken. 

In  Deut.  X.  8,  xxi.  5  (cf.  xxxiii.  10)  the  tribe  of  Levi  is  expressly  declared 
to  have  been  separated  from  the  rest  of  Israel  to  bear  the  Ark  of  the 
Covenant,  to  minister  before  Jehovah,  to  bless  in  His  name,  and  to  decide 
matters  of  controversy  (cf.  xvii.  9) ;  and  the  priests  throughout  are  identified 
with  the  Levites.  But  since  Deuteronomy  enjoins  the  establishment,  when 
Israel  should  occupy  Canaan,  of  a  single  sanctuary,  it  follows  that  in  the 
view  of  the  writer,  the  numerous  Levites  in  the  country  districts,  though 
potentially  priests,  could  only  properly  exercise  their  functions  when  they 
visited  the  central  seat  of  worship ;  see  Deut.  xviii.  6-8  and  cf.  2  Kg.  xxiii.  9. 

In  the  laws  contained  in  Leviticus  and  Numbers,  derived  from  P,  the 
priesthood  is  explicitly  confined  to  the  sons  of  Aaron,  who  alone  were  to 
serve  at  the  altar  and  within  the  veil  of  the  Tabernacle  {Num.  xviii.  5,  7) 
and  to  bless  the  people  {Num.  vi.  23  foil. ).  Among  them  there  was  to  be  a 
High  Priest,  who  was  consecrated  to  his  office  by  special  rites  and  sacrifices 
{Ex.  xxix.   1-37,  Lev.  viii.,  ix.),  and  anointed  with  specially  prepared  oil 

*  Unless,  as  some  passages  in  the  historical  books  suggest,  the  ephod  used 
in  consulting  Jehovah  was  an  image ;  see  p.  282. 


144  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

(Ex.  XXX.  22-33,  Lrv.  viii.  12).  He  was  invested  with  holy  garments — 
including  linen  drawers,  a  coat  of  chequer  work  (girt  with  a  girdle),  a  robe 
of  blue,  an  embroidered  ephod  (bearing  a  breast-plate,  doubled  so  as  to  form 
a  pocket,  ornamented  with  twelve  jewels,  in  which  were  put  the  Urtm  and 
Thiimmirn),  and  a  linen  mitre  or  turban  (upon  which  was  a  plate  of  gold, 
with  the  inscription  Holy  to  Jehovah)— Al  being  of  beautiful  workmanship 
and  costly  materials  {Ex.  xxviii.).  He  alone  might  enter  the  Most  Holy 
Place,  and  that,  only  once  a  year  {Lev.  xvi.  2  foil.).  The  inferior  priests 
were  also  anointed,^  and  wore  a  dress  similar,  but  inferior,  to  that  of  the 
High  Priest :  they  ministered  in  the  Holy  Place,  but  were  not  permitted  to 
pass  the  veil  into  the  Most  Holy.  Every  one  of  the  priestly  race  who  was 
admitted  to  discharge  the  priestly  office  was  required  to  be  sound  and  perfect 
in  body  {Lev.  xxi.  17-24).  The  Levites^  as  distinct  from  the  family  of 
Aaron,  discharged  subordinate  functions,  ministering  to  the  priests  {Num. 
iii.  6,  9,  viii.  19,  xviii.  6)  and  having  the  care  of  the  furniture  of  the  Tent, 
when  covered  up  for  removal  {Num.  iv.  4  foil,  cf.  iii.  8,  25  foil.),  but  being 
excluded  from  offering  sacrifice  {Num.  xvi.  40,  cf.  xviii,  3).  The  limits  of 
age  within  which  they  were  required  to  serve  are  differently  stated  as  30-50 
{Nttm.  iv.  3  foil.,  cf.  /  Ch.  xxiii.  3)  and  25-50  {Num.  viii.  24-25),  and 
eventually  appear  to  have  been  20  50  (/  Ch.  xxiii.  24,  Ez.  iii.  8).  The 
Levites,  in  being  devoted  to  the  service  of  Jehovah,  are  represented  as 
substitutes  for  the  firstborn  of  the  people  {Num.  iii.  ii  foil.,  cf.  viii.  II, 
16  foil);  and  their  consecration,  in  which  anointing  had  no  place,  was 
accompanied  by  certain  sacrificial  ceremonies.  They  were  divided  into  three 
families  (named  after  the  three  sons  of  Levi,  Gershon,  Kohath  and  Merari), 
to  each  of  which  particular  duties  in  connection  with  the  Tabernacle  were 
assigned. 

Sacrifice  among  the  Hebrews  was  intended  to  serve  one  of 
three  purposes,  (i)  to  pay  honour  to  the  Deity,  (2)  to  bring  about 
communion  with  Him,  (3)  to  make  atonement  for  sin :  and  in 
general  the  treatment  of  the  offering  varied  according  to  the 
object  contemplated. 

(i)  Offerings  made  to  the  Deity  in  acknowledgment  of  His 
goodness  and  bounty  were  both  cereal  (the  produce  of  the  corn- 
field and  vineyard)  and  animal  (taken  from  the  flock  or  the  herd). 
Among  the  former  were  the  firstfruits  which  in  Ex.  xxiii.  19 
(cf.  xxii.  29)  are  directed  to  be  brought  into  the  house  of 
Jehovah;  and  it  was  especially  in  connection  with  the  three 
agricultural  festivals  named  below  that  offerings  indicative  of 
homage  were  enjoined  {Ex.  xxiii.  15).  An  offering  of  a  similar 
kind  was  the  Shewbread  which  was  placed  before  Jehovah,  ^ 
doubtless  in  the  Tent  of  Meeting  (as  described  in  Ex.  xxv.  30 

1  So  stated  in  Ex.  xxx.  30,  xl.  15,  xxviii.  41  (cf.  also  Lev.  vii.  36, 
Num.  iii.  3),  but  Lev.  vi.  22,  xvi.  32,  xxi.  10  imply  that  there  was  only  one 
anointed  priest. 

>»  Cf.  the  lectisUmia  of  the  Romans;  see  also  Hdt.  i.  181,  183. 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        145 

from  P),  and  which,  though  not  mentioned  in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii., 
is  proved  by  i  Sam.  xxi.  6  to  be  an  early  institution  in  Israel. 
How  these  offerings  were  disposed  of  is  not  explicitly  stated 
in  the  earliest  code;  but  they  were  probably  consumed  by  the 
priests  (as  the  Divine  representatives),  or  even  by  any  person 
who  was  technically  "clean"  (see  i  Sam.  xxi.  4).  In  the  case 
of  animal  sacrifices  the  whole  victim  was  burnt  (with  the  ex- 
ception, perhaps,  of  the  skin)  and  thereby  conveyed  in  the  form 
of  smoke  and  savour  to  the  Deity  {Num,  xxiii.  4,  6^Jud.  vi.  26, 
xiii.  16,  z  Sam.  vii.  9,  I  Kg.  iii.  4).  On  the  other  hand,  offerings 
of  liquids  (wine  or  water)  were  poured  upon  the  earth  (see 
I  Sam.  vii.  6,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  16). 

(2)  Sacrifices  offered  for  the  purpose  of  effecting  communion 
with  the  Deity  were  meals  at  which  the  Deity  was  believed 
to  be  present.  Participation  of  the  same  food  was  a  recognised 
bond  amongst  men  (see  Josh.  ix.  14),  the  making  of  a  covenant 
being  often  followed  by  a  sacrificial  feast  {Gen.  xxxi.  44-54); 
and  the  like  principle  obtained  in  the  intercourse  between  man 
and  God.  Amongst  the  Hebrews  the  sharers  of  these  sacrificial 
feasts  were  said  to  eat  and  drink  before  Jehovah  (Ex.  xviii.  12, 
cf.  xxiv.  11);  and  the  prevalent  idea  amongst  the  surrounding 
nations  generally  was  that  the  Deity  himself  was  a  partaker  with 
them  in  such  covenant  -  meals  {Deut.  xxxii.  38).^  The  sacred 
meal  consisted  principally  of  flesh,  accompanied  perhaps  by 
bread  and  wine.  To  form  it  the  firstlings  of  all  domestic 
animals  that  were  clean  were  slaughtered  {Ex.  xxii.  30),  sub- 
stitutes being  offered  for  such  as  were  unclean  {Ex.  xiii.  13, 
xxxiv.  20).  The  blood  was  probably  the  portion  consecrated 
to  the  Deity,  the  drinking  of  it  being  forbidden  (as  appears  from 
I  Sam.  xiv.  34)  ;2  and  this  doubtless  lies  behind  the  prohibition 
against  eating  flesh  torn  by  beasts,  from  which  the  blood  had  not 

^  Cf.  Horn.  //.  ix.  535  Oeol  daivwd*  Uarbfi^ai.  It  is  possible  that  sacrifices 
of  communion  were  originally  connected  with  totemisnt,  the  flesh  of  the 
totetn  animal  being  shared  by  all  his  reputed  kinsmen,  who  thereby  renewed 
their  union  with  their  god.  If  so,  the  deity  at  first  provided,  rather  than 
shared,  the  feast. 

2  The  prohibition  against  drinking  the  blood,  which  is  strongly  emphasized 
both  in  Deut.  and  Lev. ,  was  probably  in  part  directed  against  heathen  usages 
(see  'Zech.  ix.  7).  The  connection  in  which  it  appears  in  Lev.  xix.  26  suggests 
that  blood  was  drunk  by  heathen  diviners  in  order  to  become  inspired  (a 
practice  followed  at  Argos  and  some  other  places  in  Greece,  see  Frazer, 
L 


146  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

been  properly  drained  {Ex.  xxii.  31).  To  this  class  of  sacrifices 
(which  are  the  Peace-ofiferings  of  Ex.  xx.  24,  xxiv.  5,  xxxii.  6, 
cf  Deut  xxvii.  7)  probably  the  Passover  belonged. 

(3)  The  early  history  of  Atoning  sacrifices  is  obscure.  Offer- 
ings made  for  the  purpose  of  atonement  are  mentioned  in 
I  Sam.  iii.  14,  xxvi.  19;  and  it  is  probable  that  they  consisted 
generally,  though  not  exclusively,  of  animal  victims,  which  were 
either  burnt  {2  Sam.  xxiv.  25,  cf.  Mic.  vi.  6-7,  Job  i.  5),  or  else 
left  to  the  priests  to  consume.  The  passages  just  adduced  seem 
to  favour  the  belief  that  the  idea  underlying  atoning  sacrifices 
was  the  rendering  of  material  satisfaction  for  the  wrong  done, 
or  the  mulcting  of  the  offender  in  a  fine  (see  especially  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  24),  rather  than  the  substitution  of  a  beast's  life  for  a 
forfeited  human  life  (but  see  below). 

In  the  Priestly  code  the  sacrificial  system  was  very  elaborate.  The 
materials  were  (i)  animal,  (2)  non-animal.  Animal  victims  were  required 
to  be  " clean, "^  without  blemish,'  and  usually  of  the  male  sex:  in  practice, 
they  consisted  of  oxen,  sheep,  goats,  and  doves  or  pigeons.  The  non- 
animal  materials  used  were  meal  (or  flour),  salt,  oil,  wine,  and  frankincense. 

The  sacrifices  were  of  four  kinds  :  (i)  Bur7it -offerings  ;  (2)  Peace-offerings^ 
(which  included  thanksgi\'ing,  votive,  and  freewill  offerings,  see  Lev.  vii. 
II-16);  (3)  Sin-offerings;  (4)  Guilt  -  offerings.  Ordinarily  these  were 
animal  sacrifices,  the  victim  being  slaughtered  by  the  offerer  (who  was 
required  to  place  his  hands  upon  it),  but  the  rest  of  the  ritual  acts  being 
performed  by  the  priest.*  The  method  of  disposing  of  the  blood  and  the 
flesh  varied  in  each  class. 

(i)  \xi  Burnt-offerings'^  the  blood  was  dashed  on  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
and  the  flesh  entirely  burnt  {Lev,  i.,  Ex.  xxix.  15-18). 

Golden  Bought  i.  p.  34).  Deut.  which,  like  Ex.  xxii.  31,  forbids  flesh  torn  by 
beasts  to  be  eaten  by  Hebrews,  allows  it  to  be  given  to  a  stranger  or  sold  to 
a  foreigner  {Deut.  xiv.  21).  In  Lev,  xvii.  15  the  chance  eating  of  such  flesh 
involves  ceremonial  uncleanness  in  the  case  of  a  Hebrew  and  a  stranger  alike ; 
whilst  according  to  ver.  IQ-12  he  who  drinks  the  blood,  whether  Hebrew  or 
stranger,  is  to  ^  cut  off. 

^  "Clean"  animals  (which  might  be  eaten)  were  (i)  quadrupeds  that 
parted  the  hoof  and  chewed  the  cud,  (2)  all  birds,  with  certain  specified  ex- 
ceptions (chiefly  birds  of  prey  and  sea  fowl),  (3)  fishes  that  possessed  fins  and 
scales,  (4)  certain  insects  like  the  locust  and  its  congeners  {Lev.  xi.  2-23, 
Deut.  xiv.  4-20). 

"^  See  Deut.  xv.  21,  xvii.  i.  Lev.  xx.  21-25  (for  ver.  24  c£  Hom.  IL  xxiiL, 

147  ft'opxtt  .  .  .  M^V  Upeuciiv). 

'  A  Peace-offering  was  required  whenever  an  animal  was  slaughtered 
(presumably)  for  food ;  see  Lev.  xvii.  1-7. 

*  A  Carthaginian  inscription  of  the  4th  or  5th  century  B.C.,  preserved  at 
Marseilles,  contains  certain  parallels  to  the  Hebrew  sacrificial  laws,  including 
the  terms  peace-offering  and  whole  burnt -offering  {i  Sam.  vii.  9). 

'  In  the  Priestly  code,  Burnt-offerings,  besides  being  appointed  for  vahoas 


RELIGION    IN   THE    MOSAIC   AGE        147 

(2)  In  Peace-offerings  the  blood  was  dashed  on  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
the  fat,  kidneys,  caul  of  the  liver,  and  fat  tail  were  burnt,  part  of  the  flesh 
was  given  to  the  priests  (see  below,  p.  151),  and  the  rest  eaten  by  the  offerer 
and  his  friends.^ 

(3)  In  Sin-offerings  (a)  for  an  ordinary  individual  (whether  a  ruler  or 
not),  part  of  the  blood  was  put  upon  the  horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering, 
and  part  poured  at  its  base,  the  fat  was  burnt,  and  the  flesh  given  to  the 
priests  i^Lev.  iv.  22-31,  vi.  26,  29);  {b)  for  the  High  Priest  or  the  whole 
congregation,  part  of  the  blood  was  sprinkled  seven  times  before  the  veil, 
part  put  on  the  horns  of  the  altar  of  incense,  ^  and  the  rest  poured  at  the  base 
of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering,  the  fat  and  other  portions  named  above  were 
burnt  on  the  altar,  and  the  flesh  was  burnt  without  the  camp  i^Lev.  iv.  1-21, 
Ex.  xxix.  10-14). 

(4)  In  Guilt -offerings'^  part  of  the  blood  was  sprinkled  on  the  altar  and 
part  poured  at  its  base,  the  fat  and  other  portions  were  burnt,  and  the  flesh 
became  the  property  of  the  priests  {Lev.  vii.  1-7). 

In  the  case  of  animal  sacrifices  neither  the  fat  nor  the  blood  might  be 
eaten  (see  Lev.  iii.  17,  vii.  22-27,  xvii.  10-14;  cf.  Deut.  xii.  16,  23-25, 
XV.  23. 

Offerings  of  meal  and  other  non-animal  materials  were  usually  the  accom- 
paniments, in  various  proportions,  of  flesh  sacrifices,  especially  Peace- 
offerings  (see  Num.  xv.  1-16).  When  a  meal-offering  was  made  separately, 
a  portion  (unleavened  and  seasoned  with  salt)  was  burnt  on  the  altar,  and  the 
rest  given  to  the  priests  {Lev.  c.  ii.,  vi.  14-18).  A  meal-offering  might 
serve  as  a  sin-offering,  if  the  offender  was  too  poor  to  afford  an  animal 
victim  {Lev.  v.  11-13) — a  fact  which  suggests  that  the  sacrifice  was  not 
vicarial  (a  life  for  a  life)  but  propitiatory  (cf.  Num.  xvi.  46-47),  though  on 
the  other  hand  see  Lev.  xvii.  1 1. 

In  the  earliest  code  five  Sacred  Days  or  Seasons  are  directed 
to  be  observed,  a  weekly  Sabbath  and  four  or  (since  the  first 
two  were  practically  inseparable)  three  Annual  feasts — Passover, 
Unleavened  Bread,  Harvest,  and  Ingathering.  At  each  of  these 
three  festivals  all  males  were  required  to  appear  before  Jehovah. 

(i)  The  institution  of  the  Sabbath  appears  to  go  back  to 
Babylonian  times,  and  was  presumably  connected  with  the  phases 

special  occasions,  were  required  to  be  made  regularly  every  day,  morning  and 
evening  {Ex.  xxix.  38-42,  Num.  xxviii.  1-8).  This  was  a  comparatively  late 
usage,  for  in  2  Kg.  xvi.  15  the  specific  mention  of  the  morning  burnt -offering 
and  the  evening  meal-offering  indicates  that  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  the  evening 
burnt-offering  had  not  yet  been  adopted. 

^  The  flesh  of  Peace-offerings  had  to  be  eaten  on  the  same  day  or  on  the 
morrow  at  the  latest  {Lev.  xix.  5-6).  If  the  Passo\er  was  a  Peace-offering  a 
similar  rule  was  directed  (in  the  earliest  legislation)  to  be  observed  in  regard 
to  it  {Ex.  xxiii.  18,  xxxiv.  25). 

2  In  Ex.  xxix.  12  the  blood  is  put  on  the  horns  of  the  altar  of  burnt-offering 
(cf.  Lev.  ix.  9). 

'  Guilt-offerings  were  made  when  reparation  for  an  injury  was  required, 
and  were  accompanied  by  a  fine  (a  fifth)  paid  to  the  individual  injured,  or  his 
kinsman,  or  failing  these,  to  the  priest. 


148  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

of  the  moon,  the  week  having  arisen  from  the  natural  division 
of  the  lunar  month  into  four  quarters.  Nothing  is  said  in 
Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  respecting  the  manner  of  observing  it,  beyond 
the  injunction  to  suspend  all  work  upon  it,  the  motive  assigned 
for  keeping  it  being  purely  humanitarian  in  Ex.  xxiii.  12,  though 
a  religious  reason  is  attached  to  the  fourth  "word"  of  the 
Decalogue  in  Ex.  xx.  11. 

(2)  The  feast  of  the  Passover  {Ex.  xxxiv.  25)  took  place  in 
the  month  Abib  (March-April),  and  was  a  pastoral  festival,  the 
origin  of  which  may  go  back  to  pre-Mosaic  times.  It  was 
possibly  the  feast  contemplated  when  the  Israelites  in  Egypt 
first  made  their  appeal  to  Pharaoh  to  be  allowed  to  go  and 
sacrifice  to  Jehovah  {Ex.  x.  9);  but  it  subsequently  became 
peculiarly  associated  with  the  memories  of  the  Exodus  {Ex. 
xii.  21-28). 

The  other  feasts  were  agricultural  in  character,  and  were  pro- 
bably first  kept  in  Canaan,  where  there  existed  parallel  institutions 
among  the  native  inhabitants. 

(3)  The  feast  of  Unleavened  Breads  which  lasted  seven  days 
{Ex.  xxiii.  15),  marked  the  beginning  of  barley  harvest,  and 
derived  its  name  from  the  fact  that  on  it  the  new  barley  as  it 
came  from  the  field  was  made  into  bread  without  any  admixture 
of  leaven.  It  was  celebrated  in  Abib  (the  month  of  corn  ears), 
and  followed  immediately  upon  the  Passover;  and  as  this  com- 
memorated the  deliverance  from  Egypt  {Ex.  xii.  21-27,  xiii. 
11-16),  the  same  associations  became  attached  to  the  succeeding 
feast  {Ex.  xxiii.  15  end,  cf.  xiii.  3,  xxxiv.  18,  Deut.  xvi.  1-8),  and 
the  two  were  blended  into  one  festival. 

(4)  The  feast  of  Harvest  {i.e.  wheat  harvest),  which  was  also 
known  as  the  feast  of  Firstfruits  or  Weeks  {Ex.  xxxiv.  22)  was 
kept,  according  to  Deut.  xvi.  9,  seven  weeks  from  the  time  when 
the  sickle  was  first  put  into  the  corn,  and  probably  lasted  one 
day. 

(5)  The  feast  of  Ingathering  (of  grapes  and  other  fruits)  fell 
at  the  end  of  the  agricultural  year  and  lasted  seven  days 
{Deut.  xvi.  13).  It  was  also  known  as  the  feast  of  Tabernacles 
{Deut.  xvi.  13),  a  name  derived  from  the  booths  erected  in 
vineyards  by  those  engaged  in  gathering  the  grapes  (cf.  Is.  i.  8) ; 


RELIGION   IN  THE   MOSAIC   AGE        149 

and  on  it  the  people  took  up  their  abode  in  tents  (see  Hos. 
xii.  9,  cf.  2i\soJud.  xxi.  19-21). 

In  Deut.  the  same  four  (or  three)  annual  feasts  are  recognised,  but  they 
are  required  to  be  kept  at  the  one  sanctuary  which  that  code  regards  as 
legitimate  (see  xvi.  I-I7).  They  are  thus  transformed  from  local  festivals 
into  pilgrimages. 

In  the  Priestly  code  the  character  of  the  Sacred  Days  and  Seasons  is 
further  changed,  and  their  number  increased.  The  Sabbath  is  invested  with 
an  exclusively  religious  significance  ;  whilst  the  mode  of  observing  the  agricul- 
tural festivals  is  very  precisely  regulated.  Three  additional  holy-days  are 
appointed  ;  and  on  all  of  them  special  sacrifices  are  directed  to  be  offered. 
The  full  list  is  as  follows  : — 

1.  The  Sabbat hy  which  is  represented  as  a  mark  of  distinction  between 
Israel  and  other  nations,  and  as  holy  unto  Jehovah,  death  being  the 
punishment  for  working  upon  it  {Ex.  xxxi.  12-17,  xxxv.  2-3 ;  cf.  Num. 
XV.  32  f. ). 

2.  The  New  Moon,  marking  the  beginning  of  each  month  {Num.  x.  10, 
xxviii.  11-15). 

3.  The  Passover  {Ex.  xii.  43-49,  Lev.  xxiii.  5),  kept  on  the  fourteenth  day 
of  the  First  month.  The  Passover  victim,  which,  according  to  Deui.  xvi.  2, 
might  be  taken  from  the  flock  or  the  herd,  and  was  to  be  boiled  (ver.  7,  marg.), 
is,  in  Ex.  xii.  3-9,  restricted  to  a  lamb  or  a  kid,  and  directed  to  be  roasted. 
A  supplementary  Passover  was  appointed  for  the  fourteenth  day  of  the  Second 
Month  for  those  who  had  been  prevented  by  ceremonial  uncleanness,  or 
absence,  from  attending  at  the  ordinary  time  {Num.  ix.  9  foil. ). 

4.  The  feast  of  Unleavened  Bread,  beginning  on  the  morrow  after  the 
Passover,  and  lasting  seven  days  {Ex.  xiii.  3-10,  Lev.  xxiii.  6-8).  On  the 
morrow  "after  the  Sabbath"  (presumably  the  Sabbath  faUing  within  the 
seven  days  of  the  feast)  a  sheaf  of  the  first  fruits  of  the  barley  harvest  was 
presented  before  Jehovah  {Lev.  xxiii.  11). 

5.  The  feast  of  Weeks,  kept  seven  weeks  from  the  morrow  "after  the 
Sabbath,"  on  which  the  sheaf  of  new  barley  was  presented.  On  it  two 
leavened  loaves  were  offered  to  Jehovah,  made  from  the  new  wheat  {Lev, 
xxiii.  15-20). 

6.  The  feast  of  Trumpets,  on  the  first  day  of  the  Seventh  month  (which 
in  earlier  times  was  the  First  month).  It  obtained  its  name  from  the  Silver 
Trumpets  which,  though  blown  to  mark  many  religious  occasions  (see  Num. 
X.  10),  were  on  this  day  blown  continuously  {Lev.  xxiii.  24). 

7.  The  day  of  Atofiement  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  Seventh  month,  which 
ditTered  from  all  the  others  in  being  a  universal  fast.^  This  was  marked 
by  two  exceptional  ceremonies,  (i.)  The  High  Priest,  divested  of  his  more 
splendid  robes,  and  clad  in  linen  garments,  entered,  for  the  only  time  in 
the  year,  into  the  Holy  of  Holies,  where  he  offered  incense  before  Jehovah. 
(ii. )  Two  goats  were  set  apart,  one  for  Jehovah  and  one  for  Azazel,  the  latter 
a  supernatural  power  beheved  to  haunt  the  desert.'^  The  goat  assigned  for 
Jehovah  was  then  sacrificed  by  the  High  Priest  as  a  sin-offering  for  the 

^  The  general  fast  and  the  public  confession  of  sins,  which  are  prescribed  in 
connection  with  the  day  of  Atonement,  were  characteristic  of  a  late  period  in 
Jewish  religious  history;  see  for  the  former  2  Is.  Iviii.  3,  Zech.  vii.  1-7,  and 
for  the  latter  Neh.  ix.  2  foil. 

^  In  the  book  of  Enoch,  Azazel  is  represented  as  the  leader  of  the  Angels 
who  formed  unions  with  the  daughters  of  men  {Gen.  vi.  2-4),  and  for  his 


150  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

people,  and  the  blood  of  this,  together  with  the  blood  of  a  bullock,  slain 
as  a  sin-offering  for  himself,  he  sprinkled  on  the  Mercy  Seat,  as  well  as  seven 
times  before  it.  The  object  of  this  was  to  make  atonement  for  the  Most 
Holy  Place ;  and  in  a  similar  manner  atonement  was  next  made  for  the 
Holy  Place  (probably  by  sprinkling  the  blood  upon  the  altar  of  incense, 
cf.  Ex.  XXX.  lo),  and  for  the  altar  of  burnt-offering  (see  Lev.  xvi.  16-20). 
After  this  the  second  goat,  over  which  a  public  confession  of  the  people's 
sins  was  made,  was  sent  away  into  the  wilderness,  to  carry  the  people's 
iniquities  into  a  solitary  land.^  After  this,  the  High  Priest  resumed  his 
gorgeous  robes,  and  offered  certain  stated  burnt-offerings  for  himself  and 
the  people. 

8.  The  feast  of  Tabernacles,  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  Seventh  month. 
To  the  seven  days  previously  observed,  during  which  the  people  were  expressly 
directed  to  dwell  in  booths,  an  eighth  day  was  added,  on  which  a  solemn 
assembly  was  kept  {Lev.  xxiii.  36). 

For  the  sacrifices  offered  at  these  various  festivals  see  Num.  xxviii. 
and  xxix. 

In  Ex.  XX. -xxiii.  the  Priestly  dues  from  the  sacrifices  and 
offerings  are  nowhere  definitely  stated ;  but  it  is  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  the  First-fruits  were  appropriated  by  the  priests,  and 
it  is  clear  from  i  Sam.  ii.  13  foil,  that  they  also  had  a  share  of 
the  flesh  offerings.  About  their  other  means  of  support  the 
record  in  Exodus  is  equally  silent. 

In  Deut.  it  is  laid  down  that  in  the  allotment  of  Canaanite  territory  the 
Levitical  priests  shall  have  no  share,  but  shall  dwell  amongst  the  other  tribes 
(xii.  12,  xiv.  27),  and  receive,  when  discharging  their  priestly  office,  certain 
portions  of  the  offerings  (xviii.  i).  These  are  {a)  the  firstfruits  of  corn,  oil, 
wine,  and  wool ;  {b)  the  shoulder,  the  two  cheeks,  and  the  maw,  of  the 
animals  sacrificed  in  Peace-offerings  (xviii.  3-4).  Apart  from  these  per- 
quisites, their  only  means  of  support  was  the  provision  made  for  the  friendless 
and  poor,  viz.,  a  triennial  tithe  of  the  produce  of  the  field.  For  two  out  of 
every  tliree  years  a  tithe  of  the  corn,  wine,  and  oil,  together  with  the  first- 
lings of  the  flocks  and  herds  (cf.  xv.  19-20),  was  consumed  by  each  house- 
holder at  a  religious  feast,  his  servants  and  dependants  (including  the  Levites 
within  his  gates)  partaking  of  it  with  him  (xiv.  22-27).  But  in  the  third  year 
the  whole  of  the  tithe  was  stored  for  the  support  of  the  Levites  and  the  poor 
(xiv.  28,  29 ;  cf.  xxvi.  12-13). 

In  the  Priestly  code,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  directed  that  out  of  the  cities 
occupied  by  Israel  in  Canaan,  forty-eight,  with  their  respective  suburbs  or 
pasture-lands,  are  to  be  reserved  for  the  Levites  generally,  thirteen  of  which  are 
assigned  to  the  Priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron  {Num.  x:x.xv.y/osA.  xxi.)  ;^  and  to 

wickedness  was  bound  under  rough  and  jagged  rocks  in  the  desert  until  the 
Judgment  (see  Driver  in  Hastings'  £>u^.  Bib.,  i.  p.  207). 

^  Parallel  practices  embodying  the  belief  that  sins  or  moral  impurities  can 
be  physically  removed  have  existed  at  different  times  in  various  parts  of  the 
world.  At  Athens,  for  instance,  on  the  occasion  of  the  Thargelia,  two  victims 
were  led  out  of  the  city  as  Kaddpaia,  one  for  the  men  and  the  other  for  the 
women. 

^  This  provision  does  not  seem  to  be  contemplated  in  Num.  xviii.  20. 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        151 

the  Levites  in  addition  there  is  granted  regularly  a  tithe  not  only  of  the  pro- 
ducts of  the  soil,  but  also  of  all  flocks  and  herds  {Num.  xviii.  21,  Lev.  xxvii. 
30-33).  But  of  this  tithe  the  Priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron,  are  to  have  a  tenth 
{Num.  xviii.  26),  and  to  receive,  besides,  the  skin  of  burnt-offerings  {Lev.  vii. 
8)  the  "wave"  breast  and  "heave"  thigh  (or  leg)^  of  the  Peace-offerings 
{Lev.  vii.  31-34,  x.  14-15),  such  parts  of  other  offerings  (sin,  guilt,  and  meal 
offerings)  as  were  not  burnt  {Lev.  vii.  6-7,  x.  12-13,  Num.  xviii.  9),  the 
shewbread  {Lev.  xxiv.  9),  the  firstfruits  of  the  corn,  wine,  oil,  and  fruit, 
the  firstlings  of  the  cattle  {Num.  xviii.  12-13,  i7-i8),  all  "devoted"  things 
(ver.  14),  and  the  redemption  money  paid  for  each  firstborn  of  men 
(5  shekels)  and  unclean  beasts  (ver.  15-16). 

Temporary  exclusion  from  social  converse  and  a  fortiori  from 
participation  in  religious  ceremonies  or  from  contact  with  holy 
things  was  imposed  upon  all  who  were  unclean.  What  com- 
municated uncleanness  is  not  stated  in  the  earliest  legislative 
code :  but  it  may  be  concluded  from  incidental  references  else- 
where that  such  a  condition  was  produced  by  disease  (such  as 
leprosy,  Num.  xii.  14),  connubial  intercourse  {Ex.  xix.  15, 
cfo  I  Sam.  xxi.  4),  and  probably  child-birth,  contact  with  a 
corpse,  and  some  other  circumstances.  Nothing  is  known  of  the 
means  employed  for  removing  the  uncleanness,  beyond  what  may 
be  inferred  from  the  practice  of  later  times. 

In  P  elaborate  directions  are  given  for  effecting  purification  after  child- 
birth, leprosy,  certain  discharges,  eating  the  carcase  of  beasts  that  have  died 
or  been  torn,  and  contact  with  a  human  corpse  or  grave  (see  Lev.  xi.-xv.. 
Num.  xix,,  xxxi.  19-24).  In  the  case  of  leprosy,  in  addition  to  certain  pre- 
scribed sacrifices,  two  birds  were  taken,  with  cedar-wood,  scarlet,  and 
hyssop ;  and  after  one  bird  had  been  slain  over  running  water,  the  other,  with 
the  cedar  wood,  the  scarlet,  and  the  hyssop,  was  dipped  in  its  blood  and  then 
allowed  to  depart,  probably  to  carry  the  taint  of  the  plague  away.^  The 
blood  of  the  slain  bird  was  also  sprinkled  seven  times  (probably  with  the 
hyssop)^  on  the  man,  who  was  required  to  bathe  himself  and  shave  all  his  hair 
{Lev.  xiv.) 

^  The  wave  breast  was  so  called  because  it  was  waved  to  and  fro  before  the 
altar  to  symbolise  its  presentation  to  the  Deity  {L^v.  vii.  30) ;  but  the  heave 
thigh  obtained  its  name  from  its  being  "lifted  off"  the  rest  of  the  carcase  for 
a  particular  purpose,  the  term  heave  offering  being  apphcable  to  anything 
taken  from  a  larger  mass  and  specially  reserved,  see  Ex.  xxv.  2  marg. ,  Num. 
xxxi.  41  (cf.  Driver  and  White,  Lev.  p.  69). 

^  Parallels  to  this  rite  (which  bears  an  obvious  resemblance  to  one  of  the 
ceremonies  performed  on  the  Day  of  Atonement)  are  found  elsewhere.  In 
Arabia  a  widow  before  re-marriage  is  said  to  let  a  bird  fly  away  with  the 
uncleanness  of  her  widowhood ;  and  among  a  certain  tribe  in  the  island  of 
Sumatra  "when  a  woman  is  childless,  a  sacrifice  is  offered,  and  a  bird  is  set 
free  with  a  prayer  that  the  curse  of  barrenness  may  be  upon  the  bird  and  fly 
away  with  it"    (Frazer,  Golden  Bough.,  ii.  p.  151). 

'  Cf.  Ex.  xii.  22,  Ps.  li.  7.  A  sprig  of  olive  is  used  for  a  Uke  lustration  in 
Verg.  A,  vi.  23. 


152  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  pollution  attaching  to  a  person  who  had  touched  a  corpse  was 
removed  by  his  being  sprinkled  with  water  with  which  the  ashes  of  a  red 
heifer,  slain  outside  the  camp,  and  burnt  with  cedar-wood,  scarlet  and 
hyssop,  had  been  mingled  {Num.  c.  xix. ) 

Regulations  regarding  vows  have  no  place  in  the  earliest 
code  of  the  Pentateuch,  though  instances  of  vows  occur  in  the 
history  of  the  succeeding  period  (see/ud.  xi.  30,  /  Sam.  i.  11). 

In  DeuL  xxiii.  21-23  remissness  in  the  performance  of  a  vow  is  con- 
demned, but  the  subject  is  not  further  dealt  with. 

In  P  a  number  of  precise  directions  relating  to  vows  are  given ;  see  Lev. 
vii.  16-17,  xxii.  iSfoll,,  xxvii.  i  foil.,  Num.  vi.  I  foil.,  xxx.  i  foil.  Those 
regulating  the  vow  of  a  Nazirite  {Num.  vi.),  which  involved  abstinence  from 
{a)  intoxicants,  {b)  shaving  the  head,  and  (c)  contact  with  the  dead,  required, 
after  the  expiration  of  the  period  for  which  the  vow  was  taken,  the  shaving 
and  burning  of  the  hair  as  an  offering  on  the  altar.  The  rules  prohibiting, 
during  the  vow,  the  use  of  the  razor,  or  contact  with  the  dead,  reflect  the 
primitive  beliefs  that  the  hair  (probably  in  consequence  of  its  rapid  growth) 
was  in  a  special  degree  the  seat  of  life,  and  that  dead  bodies  were  highly 
charged  with  supernatural  influences ;  whilst  the  prohibition  of  the  use  of 
intoxicants  or  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine  was  probably  a  survival  of  the  oppo- 
sition felt  to  vine-culture  by  those  accustomed  to  a  nomadic  life.  The 
Nazirites  were  thus  at  first  men  who  clung  to,  and  championed,  the  old 
religious  convictions  and  customs  of  Israel  in  the  face  of  innovations, 
especially  such  as  were  learnt  from  the  Canaanites.  The  regulations  of  the 
Priestly  code  differ  in  some  respects  from  the  practice  observed  in  the  historic 
instances  of  Samson  and  Samuel,  notably  in  the  fact  that  in  these  two  cases 
the  vow  was  life-long,  whereas  temporary  vows  are  contemplated  in  Num.  vL^ 

II.  The  principal  subjects  which  the  laws  regulating  civil  and 
social  conduct  have  in  view  are  (i.)  Personal  injuries ;  (ii.)  Injuries 
to  property;  (iii.)  Marriage;  (iv.)  Inheritance;  (v.)  the  Tenure 
of  Land;  (vi.)  Slavery. 

(i.)  The  deliberate  homicide  was  punishable  by  death,  a  money 
compensation  not  being  permitted  {Ex.  xxi.  12,  23,  cf.  Lev, 
xxiv.  17,  Num.  XXXV.  31).  But  for  the  rash  homicide  the  right 
of  asylum  which  sanctuaries  in  general  possessed  in  the  ancient 
world  2  was  available.  The  sanctity  attaching  to  a  holy  place  was 
believed  to  be  communicated  to  anyone  who  came  in  contact 
with  it;  and  the  unintentional  murderer  was  protected  if  he 
succeeded  in  escaping  to  Jehovah's  altar  {Ex.  xxi.  13-14,  cf. 
I  Kg.  i.  50,  ii.  28). 

In  both  Deuteronomy  and  the  Priestly  code  there  is  substituted,  for  the 
asylum  offered  by  the  altar  of  Jehovah,  a  certain  number  of  cities  of  Refuge, 
the  elders  of  which  (according  io/osh.  xx.  4)  decided  whether  the  homicide 

^  See  also  p.  286.  "  Cf.  (for  instance)  Tac.  Ann.  iii.  60. 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        153 

who  had  fled  thither  could  justly  claim  protection.  If  he  could,  he  was  safe 
so  long  as  he  remained  within  the  walls  ;  but  if  caught  outside  his  blood  was 
on  his  own  head.  In  Dtut.  iv.  41-43  three  cities  are  appointed  for  this  pur- 
pose by  Moses  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  (Bezer,  Ramoth  Gilead,  and  Golan) ;  and 
in  xix.  I  foil,  three  cities  are  to  be  designated  with  the  same  object  on 
the  W.  of  Jordan,  and  a  further  triad  is  to  be  added  in  the  event  of  an 
increase  of  territory  (ver.  8-9).  In  Num.  xxxv.  9  foil,  (from  P),  the  cities  are 
to  be  six — three  on  either  side  of  Jordan,  included  among  the  Levitical  cities 
— and  it  is  directed  that  the  unintentional  homicide  shall  stay  in  the  city  to 
which  he  has  fled  until  the  death  of  the  High  Priest,  when  he  is  to  be  free  to 
return  home.  In  Josh.  xx.  7  the  names  of  the  cities  of  Refuge  on  the  E.  of 
Jordan  are  identical  with  those  given  in  Deuteronomy,  with  the  addition 
(on  the  W.  of  Jordan)  of  Kedesh,  Shechem,  and  Kiriath-arba  or  Hebron,  but 
all  are  (apparently)  appointed  by  Joshua.  The  substitution  of  certain  cities  as 
places  of  Refuge  instead  of  the  altar  of  Jehovah  would  be  first  rendered 
necessary  when  the  national  worship  was  restricted  to  one  spot. 

In  Deut.  xxi.  1-9  it  is  directed  that  if  the  perpetrator  of  a  murder  cannot  be 
detected,  atonement  for  the  guilt  that  has  fallen  on  the  land  is  to  be  made  by 
the  sacrifice  of  a  heifer  in  an  unploughed  valley  near  a  running  stream,  in  the 
water  of  which  the  sacrificing  priests  are  to  wash  their  hands. 

A  master  who  in  chastising  a  slave,  caused  his  death,  was  only 
liable  to  punishment  if  the  victim  died  under  his  hand :  otherwise 
he  went  scatheless  {Ex.  xxi.  20-21). 

If  an  ox,  known  to  be  dangerous,  gored  a  free-man  to  death, 
the  owner  either  forfeited  his  life  or  was  allowed  to  redeem  it  by 
a  money  fine,  according  (presumably)  as  the  judges  might  deter- 
mine ;  but  if  the  victim  were  a  slave,  he  made  good  the  loss  by 
the  payment  of  30  shekels  of  silver  (xxi.  28-32). 

The  kidnapping  of  a  fellow-Hebrew  for  the  purpose  of  selling 
him  as  a  slave  was  punished  by  death  {Ex.  xxi.  16,  cf.  Deut. 
xxiv.  7).  For  minor  injuries  to  the  person  the  penalties  imposed 
were  based  generally  upon  the  principle  of  exact  retaliation 
{Ex.  xxi.  23-24,  cf.  Lev.  xxiv.  19-20),  though  in  some  cases 
a  money  fine  might  be  inflicted  at  the  discretion  of  the  judges 
(xxi.  22).  A  slave,  if  he  suffered  the  loss  of  an  eye  or  a  tooth 
from  his  master's  ill-treatment,  thereby  obtained  his  hberty 
(xxi.  26-27). 

Injury  or  insult  to  a  parent,  such  as  smiting  or  cursing  him, 
was  punishable  by  death  (see  Ex.  xxi.  15,  17,  cf.  Deut.  xxvii.  16, 
Lev.  XX.  9). 

In  Deut.  xxi.  18-20  a  son  who  is  irredeemably  stubborn  and  rebellious 
towards  his  parents  is  required  to  be  stoned. 

Special  injunctions  were  directed  against  bearing  false  witness, 


154  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

and  taking  up  a  false  report  {Ex.  xx.  i6,  xxiii.  i);  and  according 
to  Deuteronomy  (xix.  16-21)  a  false  witness  was  to  be  punished  by 
the  iex  ialionis,  "  ye  shall  do  unto  him  as  he  thought  to  do  unto 
his  brother." 

(ii.)  Misappropriation  of  property  seems  generally  to  have 
been  punished  by  restitution ;  and  culpable  damage  was  required 
to  be  made  good  {Ex.  xxi.  33-34,  xxii.  5-6,  14-15).  In  certain 
cases  of  theft  the  restitution  exacted  was  considerably  in  excess 
of  the  loss  sustained,  but  the  precise  amount  varied.  Thus  if  an 
ox  was  stolen  and  then  killed,  the  restitution  required  was  five- 
fold ;  if  a  sheep,  it  was  four-fold ;  but  if  either  was  found  alive  in 
the  thief's  possession,  he  only  paid  the  owner  double.  The 
slaying  of  a  house-breaker  at  night  did  not  involve  blood-guilti- 
ness, but  did  so  if  it  occurred  in  the  daytime  {Ex.  xxii.  1-4). 

In  Deuteronomy  specific  warnings  are  directed  against  the  use  of  light 
weights  and  short  measures,  and  the  removal  of  a  neighbour's  land-mark 
(xxv.  13-16  (cf.  Lev.  xix.  35-36),  xix.  14). 

In  Lev.  vi.  1-7  theft  is  atoned  for  by  restitution,  together  with  one-fifth  of 
the  value  of  the  property  stolen. 

(iii.)  Marriages  were  generally  arranged  by  the  parents  of  the 
contracting  parties  {see/ud.  xiv.  2).  Children,  especially  females, 
being  in  a  great  measure  regarded  as  the  property  of  their  fathers, 
a  girl  at  marriage  was  to  all  intents  and  purposes  bought  by  her 
husband,  who  gave  for  her  to  her  parents  gifts  of  value,  like  the 
Homeric  eSva^  {Gen.  xxiv.  53,  xxxiv.  12,  cf.  i  Sam.  xviii.  25). 
The  practice  of  both  pre-Mosaic  and  post-Mosaic  times  indicates 
that  polygamy  was  usual,  the  desire  of  a  family  being  deeply 
rooted  among  the  Hebrews  as  among  other  Semitic  races.  From 
the  usage  of  later  times  it  may  be  concluded  that  there  was  for 
long  no  absolute  bar  to  intermarriage  between  children  of  the 
same  father  by  different  mothers  (see  2  Sam.  xiii.  13,  and  cf. 
Gen.  XX.  12);  but  such  unions  came  to  be  forbidden  by  the 
Levitical  code  {Lev.  xviii.  6  foil.).  Intermarriage  between 
Hebrews  and  the  inhabitants  of  Canaan  was  prohibited  {Ex. 
xxxiv.  15-16,  cf.  Deut.  vii.  3,  4),  but  the  prohibition  was  not 
regarded  (until  quite  late  times)  as  applying  to  alliances  with 
other  neighbouring  nations  (cf  /uif.  xiv.  3,  J^u/k  i.  4,  JVum.  xii.  i, 
2  Sam.  iii.  3). 

*  Horn.  Od.  xi.  283,  yiifiey  eoy  5tcl  koXKos,  ivel  irope  fivpla  ^8va  j  cf.  xvi.  390, 


RELIGION    IN   THE    MOSAIC   AGE         155 

In  Deut.  marriage  between  persons  intimately  connected  by  kindred  or 
aRlnity  is  forbidden  (xxii.  30,  xxvii.  20,  22),  and  Lev.  xviii.  6-18  contains  a 
table  of  relationships  within  which  union  is  prohibited. 

By  the  custom  of  Levirate  marriage  (a  usage  which  prevails 
in  many  parts  of  the  globe)  if  a  man  died  childless,  his  brother 
married  his  widow,  and  the  eldest  child  born  of  the  union  in- 
herited the  name  and  property  of  the  deceased  (see  Ge7i.  xxviii.  8, 
DeuL  XXV.  5  f.).^ 

According  to  Deut.  xxv.  5-10,  if  a  man  refused  to  undertake  the  duty  of 
raising  up  seed  to  his  dead  brother,  the  widow,  in  the  presence  of  the  elders, 
was  required  to  loose  his  shoe  and  spit  in  his  face.' 

For  Adultery  (expHcitly  prohibited  in  Ex.  xx.  14)  no  penalty 
is  assigned  in  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.,  but  it  was  no  doubt  that  which  is 
laid  down  in  Deut.  xxii.  22,  Lev.  xx.  10,  viz.  death,  probably 
by  stoning  (cf.  Deut.  xxii.  24,  Ezek.  xvi.  38-40).  The  seduction 
of  a  betrothed  free-woman  was  probably  treated  as  adultery 
(cf.  Deut.  xxii.  23-24),  but  that  of  an  unbetrothed  girl  could 
be  compensated  for  by  the  payment  to  her  father  of  the  usual 
purchase-money^  {Ex.  xxii.  16-17). 

According  to  Num.  v.  11-31  a  married  woman  suspected  of  unfaithfulness, 
might  be  subjected  to  an  ordeal.  Dust  from  the  floor  of  the  Tabernacle  was 
mingled  by  the  priest  with  water,  and  the  woman  was  made  to  drink  it,  whilst 
a  curse  was  imprecated  on  her,  to  which  she  was  required  to  assent,  if  she 
had  been  false  to  her  husband,  which  curse  the  water,  in  the  event  of  her 
guilt,  was  believed  to  be  the  means  of  bringing  about,  causing  her  belly  to 
swell  and  her  thigh  to  fall  away.* 

It  is  probable  that  a  husband  possessed  from  early  times  the  power  to 
divorce  his  wife  ;  but  in  Deuteronomy  his  power  is  restricted  in  two  respects  : 
{a)  he  is  required  to  give  his  wife  a  bill  of  divorcement ;  {b)  he  is  forbidden, 

^  The  custom  has  been  explained  as  arising  in  a  state  of  society  in  which  a 
wife  passed,  with  the  rest  of  a  man's  possessions,  to  his  successor  (cf.  2  Sam. 
xii.  8,  xvi.  21,  I  Kg.  ii.  22).  The  fiction  that  the  offspring  of  a  Levirate 
marriage  was  the  son  of  the  deceased  brother  was  probably  invented  and 
maintained  in  consequence  of  a  feeUng  in  Israel  against  the  disappearance 
of  a  name  and  a  family  from  among  the  community  (cf.  Num.  xxvii.  4). 

^  The  transference  of  a  shoe  (which  if  cast  upon  a  portion  of  land,  marked 
possession,  Ps.  Ix.  8)  was  the  recognised  form  for  effecting  the  cession  of  a 
right  or  of  property  {Ruth  iv.  7) ;  and  the  forcible  removal  of  it  in  this  case 
symbolised  the  withdrawal  from  the  man  of  what  should  have  been  deemed 
an  honourable  privilege. 

'  Fixed  in  Deut.  xxii.  29  at  fifty  pieces  (shekels  ?)  of  silver.  In  Lev.  xix. 
20-22  the  seduction  of  a  betrothed  slave-girl  is  not  punishable  with  death. 

*  A  similar  ordeal  by  water  was  practised  at  Tyana,  where  the  water  of  a 
neighbouring  lake,  if  drunk  by  a  perjurer,  was  believed  to  produce  dropsy 
and  wasting  (Robertson  Smith,  Rel.  Sem.,  p.  180). 


156  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

in  the  event  of  his  wife  having  married  again,  and  been  again  divorced,  to 
take  her  back  (xxiv.  1-4). 

Bestiality  was  punished  with  death  {Ex.  xxii.  19,  cf.  Deut 
xxvii.  21,  Lev.  xviii.  22-23). 

(iv.)  The  law  of  Inheritance  seems  to  have  been  based  on  the 

principle  of  equal  division  amongst  the  sons,  except  in  the  case 

of  the  eldest  son.    From  very  early  times  the  eldest  son  possessed 

a  certain   birthright  {Gen.  xxv.  31);  and  in  Diut.  xxi.  17  this 

right  is  stated  to  be  a  double  portion  of  the  patrimony,  i.e.  a 

share  twice  as  large  as  that  which  fell  to  each  of  his  brothers. 

It  would  appear  that  daughters  did  not  share  with  their  brothers;  but 
their  right  to  inherit  in  the  absence  of  a  male  heir  is  laid  down  in  Num.  xxvii., 
and  it  is  further  directed,  in  order  to  prevent  the  property  from  passing  at 
their  marriage  into  another  tribe,  that  they  should  be  sJlowed  to  marry  only 
within  the  limits  of  their  own  tribe  {Num.  xxxvi.). 

(v.)  The  occupation  of  land  by  individuals  was  recognised; 
but  the  rights  of  the  community  were  asserted  at  intervals  by 
the  requirement  that  the  land  should  be  left  untilled  and  un- 
dressed every  seventh  year,  in  order  that  the  poor  of  the  people, 
together  with  the  beast  of  the  field,  might  have  the  produce 
(Ex.  xxiii.  lo-ii). 

In  Deut.  XV.  1-6  the  exaction  of  all  loans  made  to  a  fellow-Hebrew  is  like- 
wise to  be  suspended  every  seventh  year. 

In  Lev.  XXV.  1-7  (P)  the  law  requiring  the  land  to  be  left  fallow  once  in  seven 
years  has  not  only  a  philanthropic,  but  also  a  religious,  aspect:  the  seventh  year 
is  "a  sabbath  of  solemn  rest  for  the  land,  a  sabbath  unto  Jehovah."  In  the 
Priestly  code  {Lev.  xxv.  8  foil.),  in  addition  to  the  Sabbatical  year,  2i  Jubilee 
year  at  the  expiration  of  every  period  of  forty-nine  years  is  commanded  to  be 
observed,  during  which  not  only  are  all  fields  to  be  left  untilled,  but  all  land,  sold 
or  mortgaged,  is  to  return  to  its  original  possessor ;  so  that  it  could  not  be 
parted  with  in  perpetuity.  On  the  other  hand,  if  a  house  in  a  walled  city 
was  sold  and  not  redeemed  within  a  year,  it  became  the  permanent  possession 
of  the  purchaser,  and  did  not  return  to  its  original  owner  at  the  Jubilee. 
This  exception,  however,  did  not  apply  to  the  houses  of  the  Levitical  cities. 
These,  if  sold  and  not  redeemed  (ver.  33  marg.),  returned  to  the  Levites  at 
the  Jubilee. 

(vi.)  Slaves  might  be  either  foreigners  (obtained  by  capture  or 
purchase),  or  fellow-Hebrews,  who  had  been  sold  by  their  parents, 
or  had  sold  themselves,  to  meet  a  debt;  but  the  treatment  of 
these  two  classes  was  different.  Foreign  slaves  were  retained  in 
absolute  ownership,  females  frequently  being  concubines.  Their 
condition,  however,  was  far  from  intolerable ;  and  to  judge  from 
the   instances   of   Abraham's  Damascene   servant   Eliezei:   they 


RELIGION    IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        157 

might  even  inherit  their  master's  property,  if  he  was  otherwise 
without  an  heir  {Gen.  xv.  2-3).  But  a  Hebrew  man-slave  was 
required  to  be  manumitted  after  six  years  of  service,  unless  he 
elected  to  remain  with  his  master.  If  he  did  so,  he  was  brought 
before  the  judges,  his  ear  was  bored  through  by  his  master,  and 
his  bondage  became  permanent.  If  he  was  married  when  he 
became  a  bondman,  his  wife  went  out  with  him;  if  he  were 
given  a  wife  in  the  course  of  his  bondage,  his  wife  and  her 
children  remained  the  property  of  her  master.  A  Hebrew 
bondwoman,  on  the  other  hand,  was  only  allowed  to  be  manu- 
mitted in  the  event  of  her  master  espousing  her  either  to  himself 
or  his  son,  and  then  failing  to  treat  her  as  a  wife  or  a  daughter. 
At  the  same  time,  the  power  of  her  master  to  sell  her  was  re- 
stricted ;  she  could  not  be  sold  to  a  foreigner,  but  only  redeemed 
by  a  kinsman  (Ex,  xxi.  2-1 1). 

In  Dent.  xv.  12  foil.  Hebrew  bond-servants  of  both  sexes  are  treated  alike; 
it  is  further  enjoined  that  a  present  shall  be  given  to  the  liberated  slave  ;  and 
it  is  not  demanded  that  the  ceremony  of  boring  the  ear  shall  take  place 
publicly. 

In  Lev.  XXV.  39  foil.  (P)  Hebrew  servants  are  emancipated  in  the  year  of 
Jubilee,  but  bondmen  and  bondwomen  of  foreign  nationality  may  be  bought 
on  the  same  terms  (presumably)  as  other  chattels  (ver.  44). 

The  legislation  of  Ex.  xx.-xxiii.  (as  well  as  of  the  other  codes) 
does  not  confine  itself  to  precise  legal  enactments,  but  embraces 
exhortations  to  upright  dealing  and  kindly  conduct,  under  pain  of 
the  Divine  displeasure.  In  the  tenth  "  word  "  of  the  Decalogue 
covetous  desires,  the  usual  source  of  dishonest  acts,  are  for- 
bidden (xx.  17).  Special  stress  is  laid  upon  truth  and  equity  in 
the  administration  of  justice  (xxiii.  1-3,  6-8)  and  upon  mercy 
and  compassion  towards  the  needy  and  helpless.  Usury  in  the 
case  of  loans  to  fellow-countrymen  is  prohibited;  and  if  a 
garment  is  taken  in  pledge,  it  is  to  be  returned  before  the 
evening  (xxii.  25-27).  Emphatic  warnings  are  uttered  against 
the  oppression  or  ill-treatment  of  the  widow,  the  fatherless,  or 
the  stranger  (xxii.  21-24,  xxiii.  9).  Kindness  is  to  be  shown 
even  to  a  personal  enemy,  whose  ox  or  ass,  if  found  straying,  is 
to  be  brought  back  to  him,  or  if  lying  under  a  burden,  is  to  be 
relieved  (xxiii.  4-5,  cf.  Deut.  xxii.  1-4).  Even  the  offence 
caused  to  natural  sentiment  by  seething  a  kid  in  its  mother's 


158  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

milk  is  disallowed  (xxiii.  19,  xxxiv.  26)^  (just  as  in  Lrv.  xxii.  28, 
Deut.  xxii.  6-7  it  is  forbidden  to  kill  a  cow  (or  ewe)  and  her 
young  on  the  same  day,  or  to  take  from  a  nest  a  bird  and  its 
young  together.) 

The  history  and  legislation  of  the  Mosaic  period,  as  described 
in  the  preceding  pages,  show  that  there  was  much  in  Hebrew  belief 
and  Hebrew  usage  which  belonged  to  a  primitive  stage  of 
civilisation.  Religion,  for  instance,  was  not  yet  monotheistic. 
The  language  of  Miriam's  song  {Ex.  xv.  11)  implies,  indeed,  that 
there  was  no  comparison  between  Jehovah  and  other  gods,  and 
the  "  holiness  "  there  predicated  of  Him  seems  intended  to  express 
His  unapproachable  pre-eminence;  but  the  existence  of  other 
gods  appears  to  be  taken  for  granted.  With  this  agrees  the  tenor 
of  the  first  "word"  of  the  Decalogue,  which  requires  exclusive 
devotion  to  Jehovah,  but  in  its  terms,  at  least,  assumes  that  there 
were  other  deities  to  whom  it  was  feared  allegiance  might  be 
transferred.  The  subsequent  history  confirms  the  view  that  the 
people  were  not  familiar,  until  a  much  later  period,  with  the  idea 
that  the  gods  worshipped  by  their  neighbours  were  unrealities ; 
otherwise  the  continual  desertion  of  Jehovah  for  them  would  be 
incomprehensible  (cf.  also  Ruth  i.  16,  7  Sajn.  xxvi.  19).  That 
sensuous  conceptions  entered  into  the  idea  which  the  Hebrews 
formed  of  their  national  God  appears  from  the  fact  that  His 
presence  was  believed  to  be  manifested  by  such  phenomena  as 
flame  and  fire  and  cloud  {Ex.  iii.  2,  xiii.  21,  xxxiii.  9;  cf.  xvi.  lo, 
xl.  34-38  P).  From  such  a  belief  it  resulted  as  a  corollary  that 
His  activity  was  especially  associated  with  particular  localities; 
and  places  where  tokens  of  His  power  were  thought  to  have  been 
displayed  became  subsequently  centres  of  worship.  By  the 
Israelites  when  on  the  march  Jehovah's  guidance  and  protection 
were  held  to  be  intimately  connected  with  the  Ark,  which  was 
His  seat  and  symbol ;  and  it  is  possible  that  the  peculiar  sacred- 
ness  attaching  to  it  was  in  part  due  to  the  fact  that  the  stones  it 
contained  came  from  Sinai,  the  mount  of  God.  Jehovah  had  a 
claim  upon  the  Hfe  of  the  firstborn  of  man  as  well  as  of  animals 

^  But  some  scholars  hold  that  the  prohibition  was  occasioned  by  milk  thus 
prepared  being  used  as  a  superstitious  charm  for  the  purpose  of  rendering 
fields  and  trees  fruitful. 


RELIGION    IN   THE    MOSAIC    AGE        159 

(though  in  practice  the  former  were  redeemed  (xxii.  29-30)); 
and  upon  His  altar  the  blood  of  victims  was  sprinkled  {Ex. 
xxiv.  6).  No  clear  distinction  was  drawn  between  ethical  and 
ceremonial  requirements;  and  the  purity  demanded  as  a  con- 
dition for  approaching  the  Deity  was  physical  rather  than  moral. ^ 
There  was  no  effective  consciousness  amongst  the  Hebrews  at 
this  time  of  a  future  life  (a  fact  which  is  in  striking  contrast  to 
Egyptian  habits  of  thought) ;  and  there  is  no  indication  of  any 
advance  upon  the  primitive  conception  of  Sheol.  The  present 
world  was  believed  to  be  the  only  sphere  of  moral  govern- 
ment ;  and  the  rewards  promised  by  Jehovah  for  faithfulness  to 
His  commands  were  specifically  temporal  {Ex.  xxiii.  25-26; 
cf.  XX.  12,  xxii.  23-24,  Deut.  vii.  12  foil.,  xxviii.  8  foil.,  Lev, 
xxvi.  3  foil.).  Equally  defective  with  some  of  the  prevalent 
religious  ideas  were  certain  of  the  principles  regulating  the  civil 
life  of  the  people.  Wives  and  children  were  not  considered  to 
possess  individual  rights  of  their  own,  but  to  be  the  property 
of  their  husbands  and  parents,  and  hence  were  liable  to  be 
put  to  death  for  the  offences  of  the  latter  (see  Josh.  vii.  24). 
A  wrong  done  to  a  daughter  might  be  expiated  by  a  money 
payment  to  her  father  {Ex.  xxii.  16-17).  The  solidarity  thus 
assumed  to  exist  between  a  man  and  his  offspring  entered  into 
the  belief  entertained  of  the  Divine  judgment;  and  the  fear  of 
retribution  falling  upon  the  third  and  fourth  generation  is  a 
motive  to  which  appeal  is  made  in  the  second  "word"  of  the 
Decalogue  {Ex.  xx.  5-6).  Slavery  was  an  established  institution; 
and  the  enslavement  not  of  foreigners  only  but  of  fellow-Hebrews 
was  permitted.  The  bondage  of  women -slaves  was  life-long. 
The  administration  of  justice  was  of  a  very  crude  character. 
Voluntary  and  involuntary  crimes  were  only  imperfectly  dis- 
criminated ;  the  pains  and  penalties  appointed  in  cases  of  wilful 
bodily  injury  were  determined  by  the  simple  rule  of  exact 
retribution,  "an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth";  and 
in  cases  of  homicide  the  barbarous  custom  of  the  blood -feud 
prosecuted  by  the  kindred  of  the  murdered  man  seems  to  have 
been  recognised.     It  is  thus  apparent  that  the  early  Hebrews  in 

^  This  appears  even  in  the  (late)  Priestly  code,  see  Lev.  vii.  20-21,  xxiL 
1-9. 


i6o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

many  respects  stood  on  the  same  plane  of  life  and  thought  as 
their  heathen  neighbours;  and  the  parallels  adduced  from 
Semitic  and  even  Hellenic  sources  in  connection  with  their 
customs,  as  described  or  implied  in  the  Mosaic  law,  show  that 
the  resemblance  between  them  and  other  nations  extended  even 
to  details. 

But  the  Decalogue  and  other  parts  of  what  has  been  taken  to 
be  the  earliest  of  the  Legislative  codes  comprised  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch make  it  clear  that  the  Mosaic  religion  contained  the 
germs  of  spiritual  and  moral  progress  in  a  degree  beyond  the 
religions  of  the  neighbouring  peoples.  Though  Jehovah  was 
represented  not  as  the  only  existing  God,  but  as  the  only  God 
that  Israel  might  worship,  yet  the  ideas  entertained  of  His  nature 
and  requirements,  in  spite  of  the  crudities  already  noted,  were 
such  as  in  the  long-run  led  to  the  recognition  of  His  sole  God- 
head. His  activity,  though  associated  with  some  locaUties  more 
than  others,  was  not  thought  to  be  exclusively  restricted  to  any 
particular  region,  and  His  power  was  as  manifest  in  Egypt  as  by 
the  holy  mount  of  Sinai  (cf.  also  Gen,  xxviii.  15,  xlvi.  3).  What- 
ever may  have  been  the  origin  of  the  sacredness  attributed  to  the 
Ark  and  its  contents,  the  earliest  existing  accounts  of  it  bring  it 
into  connection  with  a  series  of  religious  and  moral  ordinances, 
one  of  which  expressly  forbids  the  worship  of  any  image;  and 
from  the  Mosaic  period  onwards  the  religious  leaders  of  the 
people  generally  protested  against  the  construction  of  any  symbol 
of  Jehovah  for  the  purposes  of  adoration.  This  aversion  to  a 
visible  representation  of  the  national  God  was  not,  indeed,  shared 
by  the  whole  community;  and  even  in  Moses'  lifetime,  Aaron 
(according  to  one  account)  offered  to  his  countrymen  a  Golden 
Calf  1  with  the  words  "  This  is  thy  god,  O  Israel,  that  brought  thee 

*  The  reason  which  led  to  the  choice  of  such  an  emblem  has  been  disputed. 
The  fact  that  a  living  bull  was  worshipped  in  Egypt  as  the  embodiment  of  the 
god  Osiris  has  suggested  that  the  idea  of  the  Golden  Calf  was  derived  from 
that  country.  It  is  difficult,  however,  to  suppose  that  the  Israelites  at  this 
time  consciously  borrowed  from  the  Egyptians  when  they  sought  to  represent 
visibly  the  God  who  delivered  them  from  their  hands.  It  is  more  probable 
that  as  a  symbol  of  Jehovah  a  calf  or  young  bull  was  chosen  as  being,  to  a 
people  that  did  not  yet  possess  horses,  a  natural  emblem  of  strength  and 
vigour  (see  Deut.  xxxiii.  17).  That  the  goA^ts^  Ashtoreth  was  Ukewise  some- 
times represented  under  an  animal  shape  is  suggested  by  the  term  Ashtoreths 
of  thejlock,  used  to  describe  the  young  of  sheep  {Deut.  vii.  13,  Heb.). 


RELIGION    IN   THE    MOSAIC   AGE        i6i 

up  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt.**  But  the  anger  with  which  the  Calf 
was  regarded  by  Moses  supplements,  if  corroboration  is  needed, 
the  evidence  supplied  by  the  Second  commandment  of  the  Deca- 
logue that  his  own  conception  of  religious  worship  did  not  include 
the  use  of  images.  Animal  sacrifices,  though  probably  originat- 
ing in  a  very  material  conception  of  the  Divine  nature,  could  be, 
and  no  doubt  were,  made  the  medium  of  spiritual  devotion. 
The  sexual  licence  so  prominent  in  the  religion  of  Canaan  re- 
ceived no  countenance  from  that  of  Israel  (cf.  Deut,  xxiii.  17). 
And  though  the  Israelites,  in  common  with  other  peoples,  had 
the  sanction  of  religion  for  the  sanguinary  extermination  of  their 
enemies,  the  corrupt  character  of  the  nations  they  destroyed  gives 
them  more  justification  at  the  bar  of  history  than  their  rivals  can 
command  (cf.  Lev.  xviii.  24  foil.,  xx.  23,  Deut.  ix.  5).  And  as  in 
the  religious  beliefs  of  the  Mosaic  period  the  naif  ideas  of  a 
primitive  age  were  refined  and  purified  though  not  as  yet  out- 
grown, so  in  the  social  laws  governing  their  internal  relations  rude 
and  barbarous  usages,  without  being  altogether  relinquished,  were 
brought  into  closer  conformity  with  the  requirements  of  justice 
and  mercy.  The  unintentional  homicide  was  to  some  extent 
protected  from  the  avengers  of  blood.  The  harshness  of  slavery 
was  mitigated  by  the  enactment  which  directed  the  liberation  of 
the  Hebrew  man-slave  after  six  years'  service.  The  regulations 
respecting  the  Sabbath  secured  a  time  of  rest  and  refreshment 
both  for  the  labouring  man  and  the  labouring  beast ;  whilst  those 
relating  to  the  Sabbatical  year  had  in  view  the  needs  of  the  poor. 
Compassion  and  consideration  were  enjoined  not  only  towards 
the  unfortunate  and  helpless,  but  even  towards  personal  enemies 
{Ex.  xxiii.  4,  5).  Religion  in  Israel  was  thus,  in  general,  a 
humanising  and  civilising  influence,  promoting  the  development 
and  progress  of  morality  instead  of  lagging  behind  it,  as  was 
frequently  the  rule  elsewhere.  Jehovah  was  conceived  to  possess 
an  ethical  character  which  was  lacking  to  the  gods  of  Canaan, 
and  which  made  ethical  demands  upon  the  nation  that  wor- 
shipped Him.  Implicit  in  the  "jealousy,"  with  which  He  was 
represented  as  regarding  any  declension  from  the  exclusive  fidelity 
and  obedience  which  He  claimed  from  His  people,  was  the  in- 
dignation inspired  by  the  abandonment  of  a  higher,  for  a  lower, 

M 


i62  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

moral  ideal.  And  whilst  the  standard  of  conduct  was  at  first 
rudimentary  enough,  and  was  replaced  by  a  more  advanced  one 
only  in  course  of  time,  the  growth  of  the  ethical  ideal  of  the 
Hebrews  was  wont  to  present  itself  in  the  form  of  a  fuller  appre- 
hension of,  and  a  deeper  acquaintance  with,  the  Divine  nature. 
The  Hebrew  prophets  arraigned  and  condemned  men  in  the 
name  of  God ;  they  never,  Hke  the  Greek  philosopher  Xenophanes, 
arraigned  Divinity  in  the  name  of  offended  human  morals. 

The  religion  of  Jehovah  doubtless  had  its  roots  in  the  pre- 
historic past  which  preceded  the  sojourn  in  Egypt.  Moses,  as 
has  been  related,  appealed  to  his  countrymen  in  the  name  of  the 
God  of  their  fathers ;  and  the  records  of  the  patriarchal  age,  so 
far  as  they  can  be  trusted,  not  only  indicate  that  the  Deity 
worshipped  by  the  early  ancestors  of  Israel  bore  that  name,  but 
suggest  that  some  advance  had  already  been  made  in  the  direction 
of  a  moral  and  spiritual  faith.  The  period  of  enslavement  in 
Egypt  was  not  in  itself  likely  to  enlarge  and  develop  such ;  but 
followed,  as  it  was,  by  the  deliverance  of  the  Exodus,  it  indirectly 
contributed  to  mould  Israel's  conception  of  its  God,  and  has  left 
its  mark  upon  the  Sinaitic  legislation.  The  repeated  plagues 
which  broke  down  the  obstinacy  of  Pharaoh,  and  the  signal  dis- 
comfiture which  his  pursuing  host  sustained  at  the  passage  of  the 
Red  Sea  were  strikingly  calculated  to  impress  Israel  with  the 
greatness  and  power  of  Jehovah  (cf.  Detit,  iv.  34) ;  and  in  after- 
times  the  tie  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  was  actually  dated  from 
the  Exodus  (see  Hos.  xii.  9,  xiii.  4).  But  the  mere  overthrow  of 
the  enemy  could,  for  Israel  as  for  other  nations,  only  establish 
the  superiority  of  its  God  over  the  gods  of  the  baffled  foe ;  and 
whilst  giving  to  Jehovah  a  claim  upon  the  gratitude  cf  those 
whom  He  had  aided,  would  not,  of  itself,  have  any  further  moral 
effect  It  is  in  the  triumph  of  the  Exodus  as  the  sequel  of  the 
cruel  bondage  previously  endured  in  Egypt  that  the  deepening 
of  Israel's  belief  in  Jehovah  as  a  God  of  mercy  and  compassion 
must,  at  least  in  part,  be  sought.  The  connection  between  the 
oppression,  from  which  they  themselves  had  suffered  and  been 
saved,  and  the  conduct  which  they  were  required  to  pursue 
towards  others  appears,  for  instance,  in  the  appeal  made  for  the 
considerate  treatment  of  strangers,  on  the  ground  that  they  them- 


RELIGION   IN   THE   MOSAIC   AGE        163 

selves  had  been  strangers  in  the  land  of  Egypt  (Ex.  xxii.  21, 
xxiii.  9).  From  the  answer  made  to  their  cry  under  the  pressure 
of  evil  they  had  learnt  not  only  Jehovah's  power,  but  His  charac- 
ter; and  the  knowledge  of  it  became  the  means  of  elevating 
their  own.  The  history  of  the  Wilderness  had  been  a  further 
revelation.  They  had  been  mutinous  and  unfaithful,  and  had 
come  to  understand  the  extent  of  the  Divine  patience,  fidelity, 
and  forgivingness  (cf.  jEx.  xxxiv.  6-7).  The  graciousness  which 
had  been  displayed  to  them  they  might  therefore  be  expected  to 
exhibit  in  turn ;  and  what  they  had  experienced  prepared  them 
to  respond  to  the  injunctions  put  forth  in  Jehovah's  name. 

But  Israel's  experiences  alone  scarcely  account  for  all  the  facts 
that  require  to  be  explained.  In  all  communities  the  general 
advance  is  mainly  due  to  the  initiative  of  individuals ;  and  the 
religious  and  spiritual  progress  of  Israel  was  principally  the 
work  of  its  prophets,  of  whom  Moses  was  one  of  the  chief 
(cf.  Hos.  xii.  13).  The  idea  involved  in  the  name  prophet 
(practically,  if  not  etymologically)  was  not  that  of  foretelling 
the  future,  but  of  speaking  on  behalf  of,  or  by  the  commission 
of,  another;  and  the  term  could  be  applied  to  any  person 
who  acted  as  the  spokesman  of  someone  else,  Aaron  in 
Ex.  vii.  I  being  styled  the  prophet  of  Moses,  just  as  in 
iv.  16  he  is  termed  his  mouth.  It  was,  however,  of  the 
human  interpreter  of  a  Divine  being  that  the  word  was,  in 
strictness,  used.  The  prophet  was  a  mediator  between  God 
and  mankind,^  conveying  the  Divine  mandates  to  the  people 
(cf  Jer.  XV.  19,  Am.  iii.  7,  Hag.  i.  13),  and  interceding  for  the 
people  with  the  Deity  (see  Gen.  xx.  7,  i  Sam.  xii.  23).  And  that 
in  a  pre-eminent  sense  Moses  was  such  a  mediator  appears  on 
the  surface  of  the  history.  The  knowledge  of  the  moral  and 
spiritual  nature  of  God  which,  from  his  time  onward,  in  spite  of 
occasional  aberrations,  characterised  Israel  came  not  from  any 
racial  qualities  (for  the  kindred  peoples  of  Moab  and  Edom  did 
not  attain  it),  nor  altogether  from  the  impression  made  by  events 
upon  the  nation  as  a  whole  (for  the  multitude  is  dull  of  per- 
ception), but   through   the  intellectual   insight   and    the   moral 

^  So  among  the  Greeks  Teiresias  and  Apollo  were  represented  as  the 
prophets  of  Zeus  (Find.  Nem.  i.  91,  ^Esch.  Eum.  19). 


i64  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

elevation  of  their  first  leader.  With  him  God  is  represented  to 
have  communicated,  not  as  with  the  rest  of  the  prophets,  through 
dreams  and  visions,  but  face  to  face,  "as  a  man  speaketh  to 
his  friend"  {Num.  xii.  8,  Ex.  xxxiii.  ii,  17,  cf.  Nutn.  vii.  89). 
Into  the  secret  of  such  communings  with  the  Deity  it  is,  of 
course,  impossible  to  penetrate.  But  the  expression  describes 
suggestively  the  principal  feature  of  the  Mosaic  teaching,  so  far 
as  it  can  be  recovered — its  precise  and  practical  directness,  and 
the  lofty  and  pure  spirit  which  animates  it.  Whatever  the  pro- 
cess by  which  Moses  became  possessed  of  the  principles 
embodied  in  the  Law,  they  may  justly  be  regarded  as  derived 
from  God  if  such  a  derivation  can  be  claimed  for  anything.  The 
best  warrant  for  the  Divine  commission  with  which  he  pro- 
fessed to  be  invested  is  the  character  of  the  work  wliich  he 
accompUshed. 


36                            II 

CANAAN                         /                   / 

THE    CONQUEST                        f                       o  ^^"^          / 

Scale  of  M.ies                                            e,                                 T"                   N 

u 

,H^t>u^._.MOAe                          4^-       ^^       ^^-^^"/^^-^\tem         ^ 

^ 

5i—                                                                                /*         •■       ^''           *4Aizii   7                              ) 

A.3 

/  *      Ac>u,Kafih.                                                            j 

J  r^^'¥^y 

-^ 

f        ''     AdffxjlL.       ^ii^i««^) 

o 

5 

5 
< 

■^^'y*      ^^~-~V»  " '  **«sM»i>    7 

^1 

^'Y^                                              QZfe&iT.                          /            /^y^t^i^T^^^''^^ 

\^       ''^^.x^                             \        ^y-\j   «      f 

(                      SIMEON                 C^-^'~^       1        (X 

' 

^^-—-^        (Q^ — . 

3.—                                                                                                 /\       ^V 

—  jt 

-^                /  C    D  0  M     \ 

___     __.J 

MeOiuen  S  Co 


CHAPTER  VI 
THE   CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN 

Sova:ces—/os/iua,  Jud.  i.  i-iii.  6,  xviL-xviiL 

THE  name  Canaan  in  a  general  sense  denotes  the  country 
which  stretches  from  the  Lebanons  to  the  mountains  of 
Edom  and  from  the  Mediterranean  to  the  Syrian  desert.  But 
in  a  narrower  signification  the  term  is  appHed  to  the  region 
W.  of  the  Jordan,  which,  within  the  Hmits  marked  by  the  towns 
of  Dan  in  the  north  and  Beersheba  in  the  south,  was  about  140 
miles  long,  with  an  average  breadth  of  less  than  50,^  its  surface 
covering  about  6,000  square  miles.^  As  has  been  previously 
explained,  Canaan  proper  consists,  in  the  main,  of  a  range  of 
hills,  dividing  a  long  and  narrow  strip  of  flat  coastland  from 
the  deep  gorge  of  the  Jordan.  The  range  is  cut  by  an  irregular 
series  of  valleys,  which  in  one  place  alone  broaden  into  a  com- 
paratively extensive  plain  about  nine  miles  broad  (the  Plain 
oi/ezreel  or  Esdraelon).  In  the  south,  the  western  flanks  of  this 
central  range  in  O.T.  times  received  a  distinct  name,  the  Shep- 
helah  or  Lowland.  The  country  is  poorly  watered,  for  though 
springs  are  numerous  (cf.  Deut,  viii.  7,  xi.  11),  there  are  scarcely 
any  rivers  of  size,  the  most  notable  being  the  Kishon,  flowing 
through  the  plain  of  Jezreel,  and  the  Kanah,  which  enters  the  sea 
near  Joppa,  and  is  almost  dry  in  summer.  As  may  easily  be 
inferred  from  what  has  been  said,  the  physical  features  are  very 
varied.  The  snow-clad  peaks  of  Lebanon  (nearly  10,000  feet 
above  sea-level)  contrast  strikingly  with  the  tropical  heat  of  the 

*  The  breadth  at  Beersheba  is  90  miles,  at  Jerusalem  55,  at  the  sea  of 
Galilee  40,  and  at  the  extreme  north,  25  (Henderson,  Palestine,  p.  13). 

'■^  With  the  district  E.  of  the  Jordan  included,  the  area  of  Canaan  would 
be  about  io,ooo  sq.  miles. 

165 


i66  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Jordan  valley  (which,  at  the  Dead  Sea,  is  almost  1,300  feet 
below  the  Mediterranean).  The  steep  and  stony  hills  of  the 
centre,  whose  ledges  and  terraces  at  the  period  now  under  con- 
sideration afforded  here  and  there  room  for  vineyards  and  olive- 
yards,  looked  down  upon  the  fertile  corn  lands  of  the  maritime 
plain  and  Esdraelon.  To  the  south  the  hills  merged  into  a 
rolling  pasture  land  (the  Neg(b  or  South),^  and  this  again  dis- 
appeared into  the  desert ;  whilst  around  the  marge  of  the  Dead 
Sea  the  shores  were  impregnated  with  salt  and  bitumen.  The 
products  of  the  country  were  equally  diversified.  The  sides 
of  Lebanon  were  covered  with  forests  of  cedars ;  numerous  oaks, 
sycamores,  and  terebinths  were  found  on  the  central  hills  and 
in  the  intervening  valleys ;  whilst  palms  grew  in  the  gorge  of  the 
Jordan.  Grapes,  olives,  figs,  and  pomegranates  were  cultivated 
(Deut.  viii.  8,  cf.  Num.  xiii.  23) ;  and  rich  harvests  were  obtain- 
able in  the  plains.  At  the  same  time,  the  country  was  not,  on 
the  whole,  a  grain-producing  land :  the  soil,  except  in  a  few 
places,  was  poor,  and  the  water-supply  scant ;  and  in  consequence, 
scarcity  was  by  no  means  unknown  {2  Sam.  xxi.  i,  i  Kg.  xvii., 
xviii.).  Among  the  wild  animals  that  abounded  were  lions,  bears, 
wolves,  jackals,  and  serpents;  and  the  vegetation  frequently 
suffered  from  the  attacks  of  locusts. 

Hemmed  in  by  sea,  desert,  and  mountains,  Canaan  by  the 
character  of  its  frontiers  was,  in  a  measure,  secluded  from  the 
world.  But  its  geographical  position  prevented  it  from  enjopng 
the  tranquillity  which  might  otherwise  have  been  secured  to  it. 
It  was  situated  upon  the  trade-routes  between  the  great  empires 
on  the  Euphrates  and  on  the  Nile,  and  between  these  and  the 
cities  of  Phoenicia ;  ^  and  the  principal  roads  connecting  them 
ran  through  it  or  along  its  borders.  There  were  four  trunk 
lines  traversing  the  country  from  north  to  south.  One  from 
Eg>'pt  ran  along  the  maritime  plain  across  the  ridge  of  Carmel 
to  Acco,  Tyre,  and  Phoenicia.  A  second  passed  through  the 
centre  of  the  country  from  Jerusalem  to  Esdraelon,  where  the 
preceding  formed  a  junction  with  it  by  connections  through 
Megiddo  and  Dothan,  and  whence,  crossing  the  Jordan  either 
at  Bethshan  or  between  the  lakes  of  Chinnereth  and   Merom, 

»  QL  Gen,  xiL  9.  =»  Cf.  Esek.  xxvi.  2. 


THE   CONQUEST  OF  CANAAN  167 

it  proceeded  to  Damascus  and  Hamath.  A  third  kept  along 
the  Jordan  from  Jericho  to  Bethshan.  Finally,  a  fourth,  from 
Elath  and  the  Red  Sea,  passed  E.  of  the  Dead  Sea,  through  the 
territories  of  Moab  and  Ammon,  and  thence  to  Damascus. 
Of  these  the  first  and  last  were  the  most  important,  the  other 
two  crossing  difficult  ground,  and  serving  a  more  limited  area. 
In  consequence  of  its  situation  Canaan  was  traversed  not  only  by 
the  caravans  of  merchantmen  but  by  the  armies  of  warring 
sovereigns ;  and  the  possession  of  it  was  coveted  less  on  account 
of  its  intrinsic  value  than  of  its  commanding  position.  But  in 
spite  of  the  facilities  for  communication  thus  afforded,  the  general 
features  of  the  country  tended  to  isolate  from  one  another  the 
various  communities  which  occupied  it.  The  trend  of  the  valleys 
being  from  E.  to  W.,  and  their  outlets  opening  upon  the  sea 
or  the  Jordan,  the  inhabitants  were  divided  by  natural  barriers 
into  small  bodies  which  did  not  readily  unite  to  compose  a 
nation.  The  sea  which  is  so  often  a  medium  of  intercourse  did 
not  in  this  case  promote  it,  for  the  shores  of  Palestine  are 
singularly  destitute  of  harbours.  The  ports  of  Tyre  and  Sidon 
were  outside  the  Hmits  of  Canaan  proper,  and  the  only  haven 
within  them  seems  to  have  been  Joppa.  By  the  physical  character 
of  Canaan  the  history  of  its  peoples  was  largely  moulded.  The 
independence,  the  intractableness,  the  love  of  country,  the  political 
disunion,  which  marked  the  race  of  those  who  were  its  most 
notable  possessors  are  qualities  which  a  region  of  mountains, 
valleys,  and  rocky  fastnesses  has  often  produced  alike  in  ancient 
and  in  modern  times. 

The  varied  experiences  and  chequered  fortunes  to  which 
Canaan  from  its  situation  was  inevitably  exposed  began  early. 
As  has  been  already  related,  during  the  period  which  the 
Patriarchal  history  professes  to  cover,  the  Elamites,  following 
in  the  steps  of  the  Babylonians,  included  Palestine  within  their 
dominions ;  and  when  the  Elamite  power  was  overthrown, 
Babylonian  kings  again  claimed  supremacy  over  the  country. 
Babylonian  influence  in  Palestine  seems  to  have  been  something 
more  than  transitory;  for  in  the  15th  century  B.C.  correspond- 
ence between  that  country  and  its  neighbours  was  conducted 
in  the  cuneiform  character,  which  must  have  been  introduced. 


i68  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

with  other  arts  of  civilisation,  from  Babylon.  But  Babylonian 
culture  in  this  instance  had  survived  Babylonian  authority.  From 
the  1 6th  to  the  13th  centuries  B.C.  the  dominant  people  in 
N.  Syria  were  the  Hittites;  and  these,  advancing  southward, 
threatened  Canaan.  But  their  progress  was  not  undisputed ;  and 
the  control  of  the  latter  country  was  stubbornly  contested 
between  them  and  the  great  southern  power  on  the  Nile.  The 
expulsion  of  the  Hyksos  from  Egypt  (about  1600)  had  been 
followed  by  repeated  expeditions  into  Palestine  on  the  part  of 
Egyptian  kings.  The  first  who  invaded  the  country  was  Aames 
(Amosis),  with  whom  the  i8th^  dynasty  began:  but  the  most 
notable  of  his  line  was  Thothmes  III.  (1503-1449,  Sayce),  who 
defeated  the  Hittites  at  Megiddo,  and  has  left  on  the  walls 
of  Karnak  a  list  of  Palestinian  towns  which  he  had  taken.^ 
Under  one  of  his  successors,  however,  Amenhotep  (Amenophis) 
IV.  or  Khunaten  (arc.  1400  B.C.),  the  Egyptian  hold  upon 
Palestine  became  weakened,  and  the  clay  tablets  recently  found 
at  Tell-el-Amarna,  and  largely  written  by  vassal  princes  of 
Canaanite  cities,  contain  appeals  to  him  for  help.  This  corre- 
spondence shows  that  there  were  intestine  divisions  and  quarrels 
among  the  princes  who  owned  allegiance  to  the  Pharaoh,  and 
that,  in  addition,  Egyptian  control  over  the  land  was  endangered 
partly  by  the  movements  of  the  Hittites,  and  partly  by  a  body 
of  confederates  called  the  Khabiri^  who  threatened  first  the  cities 
of  the  Phoenician  sea-board  (such  as  Gebal  and  Sirayra),  and 
subsequently  those  of  southern  Canaan  (including  Gezer  and 
Jerusalem).  In  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.  of  the  19th  dynasty 
(1348-128 1,  Sayce)  and  his  son  Mernptah  there  was  a  temporary 
renewal  of   Egyptian  authority  in  Canaan;   whilst  about   1230 

^  The  Hyksos  constituted,  or  were  contemporary  with,  the  15th,  i6th,  and 
17th  dynasties. 

^  Among  these  are  Megiddo,  Laish,  Shunem,  Taanach,  Ibleam,  Hazor, 
Achshaph  ;  see  Sayce,  H.  C.  M.,  p.  336,  Patriarchal  Palestine^  p.  226,  Driver 
in  Authority  and  Archeology,  p.  69. 

'  These  have  been  identified  by  some  scholars  with  the  Hebrews,  but  the 
identification  involves  dating  the  Exodus  much  earlier  (prior  to  1400  B.C.) 
than  is  otherwise  likely  ;  and  is  rendered  improbable  by  the  fact  that  the 
Tell-el-Amarna  tablets  bring  the  earUest  appearance  of  the  Khabiri  into 
connection  with  the  plain  of  Damascus  and  the  city  of  Ashtaroth  (E.  of  Lake 
Chinnereth),  whence  they  advanced  into  Phoenicia;  see  Petrie,  Syria  and 
^gyp^y  PP-  63,  65. 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  CANAAN  169 

Rameses  III.  overran  the  district  W.  and  S.  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
This  last,  however,  was  the  latest  invasion  of  Canaan  by  an 
Egyptian  force  until  the  time  of  the  Israelite  monarchy.  It  was 
about  this  period  that  the  Philistines  appear  to  have  settled  in 
S.W.  Palestine.  They  came,  as  has  been  already  indicated, 
from  Caphtor  which  is  usually  identified  with  Crete ;  and  in  the 
reign  of  Rameses  III.  occupied  the  five  towns  of  Gaza,  Gath, 
Ashdod,  Ashkelon  and  Ekron.  These  towns  formed  themselves 
into  a  confederacy,  and  eventually  played  no  insignificant  part 
in  the  history  of  the  country,  to  which,  indeed,  they  gave  the 
name  it  now  bears. 

At  the  time  of  the  Israelite  invasion,  the  native  inhabitants 
of  Western  Canaan,  though  often  described  collectively  as 
Canaanites,  Hittites,  or  Amorites  indifferently  {Gen.  x.  19,  Josh. 
i.  4,  xxiv.  8,  cf.  also  Josh.  vii.  7  and  9),^  were  usually  classified 
under  two  main  heads,  Canaanites  and  Amorites,  who  are  dis- 
tinguished territorially  as  the  dwellers  in  the  valleys  and  in  the 
hills  respectively  {Deui,  i.  7);  but  who  were  probably  likewise 
distinct  in  origin.  Of  the  other  nations  frequently  associated 
with  them,  the  Hittites,  Perizzites,  Hivites,  Jebusites  and  Gir- 
gashites  {Josh.  xi.  3,  xxiv.  11),  the  first,  already  alluded  to,  seem 
to  have  belonged  to  quite  a  different  race  from  either  the 
Canaanites  or  the  Amorites;  but  their  dominion  was  outside 
the  borders  of  Canaan  proper,  and  if  they  really  occupied  any 
part  of  it,  it  was  only  through  a  few  detached  settlements.  The 
rest  of  the  communities  mentioned  above  were  probably  merely 
subdivisions  of  the  Amorites  and  Canaanites,  owing  their  separate 
names  to  local  or  other  peculiarities.  These  various  peoples,  at 
the  period  now  to  be  considered,  constituted  a  number  of  in- 
dependent city-states.  Some  of  the  more  important  of  these 
had  others  subject  to  them,  such  dependent  towns  having 
either  sprung  up  under  the  shelter  of  the  larger  place  {Josh.  xv. 
45,  xvii.  II,  marg.),  or  been  subdued  by  force  (cf.  Jud.  i.  7). 
For  the  most  part,  these  city-states  each  had  its  own  king  {Josh, 
ii.  2,  viii.  I,  ix.  i,  xii.  9  foil.);  but  in  some  instances  a  non- 
monarchical  form  of  government  prevailed,  Gibeon  with  its  allied 
cities  Beeroth,  Chephirah,  and  Kiriath-Jearim  being  ruled   by 

*  See  p.  69, 


170  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

elders  {Josh.  ix.  ii).^  The  political  condition  of  the  country 
made  successful  resistance  to  invasion  difficult,  as  the  various 
communities,  even  if  not  distracted  by  the  mutual  jealousies 
revealed  by  the  Tell-el-Amarna  tablets,  could  be  beaten  and  sub- 
jugated in  detail.  As  will  appear  in  the  narrative  of  the  Israelite 
campaign,  it  was  only  on  two  occasions  that  any  attempt  was 
made  at  a  combination  of  forces  and  concerted  action.  But 
though  united  efforts  on  the  part  of  the  Canaanites  was  to  a 
great  extent  wanting,  many  individual  cities  were  in  a  position 
to  offer  a  stout  defence.  They  were  advantageously  situated  and 
strongly  walled,  so  that  their  reduction  was  a  task  of  consider- 
able magnitude  for  a  nomadic  people  (cf.  Num.  xiii.  28).  In 
addition,  the  Canaanites  were  much  superior  to  the  Israelites  in 
the  art  and  appliances  of  war,  in  touch  as  they  were  with  the 
chief  seats  of  contemporary  civilisation  in  Babylonia  and  Egypt. 
Those  who  occupied  the  more  level  districts,  especially  the  vale 
of  Esdraelon,  possessed  cavalry  and  iron  chariots;  and  these 
formidable  forces  enabled  the  inhabitants  of  the  coast  and 
inland  plains  to  withstand  their  invaders  more  successfully  than 
the  dwellers  in  the  hill-country.  It  will  be  seen  in  the  course 
of  the  history  that  where  the  Israelites  first  and  most  effectually 
established  themselves  was  in  the  mountainous  regions  of  the 
south  and  centre,  and  that  their  hold  upon  the  rest  of  the 
country  was  for  a  long  time  neither  extensive  nor  secure. 

As  has  been  said,  Joshua,  who  had  been  chosen  by  Moses 
to  succeed  him,  was  appointed  with  a  view  to  an  immediate 
invasion  of  Canaan,  and  it  was  to  this  undertaking  that  the  new 
leader  after  Moses'  death  at  once  addressed  himself.  From  the 
headquarters  at  Shittim  {Num.  xxv.  i,  xxxiii.  49)  he  determined 
to  advance  against  Jericho  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  Jordan. 
The  town  was  situated  at  a  spot  where  the  hills  retire  from  the 
river  and  form  a  plain  from  which  several  roads  diverge  into  the 
mountainous  country  behind.  It  was  thus  one  of  the  keys  to 
the  trans-Jordanic  region,  and  its  capture  was  an  object  of  the 
utmost  importance.  Accordingly  two  spies  were  sent  to  examine 
its  defences  and  the  best  means  of  attack.     The  men  crossed  the 

^  Similarly  there  .eem  to  have  been  no  kings  in  certain  of  the  cities  named 
in  the  Tell-el-Amarna  correspondence;  see  Petrie,  op.  cit.,  p.  80. 


THE   CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN  171 

river  by  the  fords  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  city,  were  sheltered 
by  a  harlot  1  named  Rahab,  and  though  rumours  of  their  arrival 
had  reached  the  king,  were  enabled  to  escape  detection  by  a 
device  of  the  woman,  who  concealed  them  under  a  quantity  of 
flax  spread  for  drying  on  the  roof  of  the  house.  The  gates  of  the 
city  had  been  closed  to  prevent  their  egress ;  but  Rahab,  whose 
dwelling  was  on  the  wall,  lowered  them  to  the  ground  through  a 
window,  having  previously  obtained  from  them  a  promise  that 
the  lives  of  herself  and  her  kinsfolk  should  be  spared  when  the 
city  was  captured. ^  The  spies,  after  hiding  for  three  days  in  the 
hills,  returned  safely  to  Joshua.  Their  report  of  the  state  of 
feeling  in  the  town,  which  the  approach  of  the  Israelites  had 
filled  with  dismay,  induced  Joshua  to  cross  the  river  at  once. 
The  passage  was  effected ;  and  the  success  with  which  it  was 
accomplished  was  ever  afterwards  regarded  as  a  special  mark 
of  Divine  favour  (cf.  Mic,  vi.  5).  The  host,  which  included  a 
contingent  from  the  tribes  E.  of  the  Jordan  ^  (represented  as 
amounting  to  the  large  figure  of  40,000),*  encamped  in  the  plain 
of  Jericho  at  Gilgal  (a  place  a  short  distance  to  the  E.  of 
Jericho  (iv.  19),  identified  with  the  modern  Tell  Jiljulieh^  four 
miles  from  the  Jordan),  where  a  memorial  of  twelve  stones  taken 
from  the  bed  of  the  river  was  set  up.  Here,  too,  the  rite  of 
circumcision  was  performed  with  knives  of  flint ^  on  all  those  who 
had  not  yet  received  the  sign  of  the  nation's  covenant  with  its 
God,  a  neighbouring  height  near  the  place  where  the  rite  was 
performed  obtaining  the  name  of  the  Hill  of  the  foreskins. 

In  the  book  oi  foshua  c.  iii.^  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  is  represented  as 

^  Josephus  {Ant.  v.  i,  2)  calls  Rahab's  dwelling  an  inn  {Ka.T<x-^iiriiov) . 

^  The  fact  that  m  fosh,  ii.  17-21  the  two  spies  give  their  pledge  to  Rahab 
after  ihey  have  been  lowered  from  the  window  (ver.  15)  is  doubtless  due  to  the 
discrepant  verses  being  derived  from  different  sources. 

3  fosh.  i.  12  represents  Manasseh  as  among  the  eastern  tribes  that  sent 
their  forces  to  join  Joshua,  but  Manasseh  had  probably  not  yet  obtained  any 
settlement  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  (cf.  p.  127). 

*  Even  this  large  figure  is  small  compared  with  the  84,230  attributed  to 
Reuben  and  Gad  alone  in  Num.  xxvi.  7,  18.  Josephus  places  the  number  of 
the  contingent  at  50,000.  *  Cf.  p.  103,  note. 

^  There  is  some  discrepancy  between  the  various  notes  of  time  in  fosh. 
i.-iii.  In  i.  ii  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  is  to  be  effected  in  three  days;  but 
the  three  days  spent  by  the  spies  in  hiding  (ii.  16)  together  with  the  three  days 
repeated  in  iii.  i,  2  from  i.  ii  imply  an  interval  of  at  least  six. 


172  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

being  wrought  by  supernatural  means.  The  priests  bearing  the  Ark  were 
directed  to  precede  the  host  at  the  interval  of  2,000  cubits  (to  prevent  its 
profanation),  and  as  soon  as  their  feet  touched  the  brink  of  the  river,  its 
waters  were  parted,  those  above  the  place  of  crossing  being  arrested  near 
the  city  of  Adam  (at  the  confluence  of  the  Jabbok  and  the  Jordan)  and  those 
below  consequently  faiUng.  The  priests  thus  stood  on  dry  ground  in  the 
midst  of  the  river,  until  the  whole  nation  passed  over,  when  the  waters 
resumed  their  course.  The  miracle  is  heightened  by  the  event  being  placed  at 
the  time  of  barley-harvest^  when  the  river  overflows  its  banks  (i  Ch.  xii.  15, 
Ecdus.  xxiv.  26),  and  spreads  over  the  lowest  of  the  series  of  terraces  by  which 
the  channel  of  the  stream  is  reached  from  the  level  of  the  Arabah.  It  does 
not,  however,  seem  improbable  that,  as  in  the  case  of  the  passage  of  the  Red 
Sea  (cf.  losh.  iv.  23),  the  crossing  was  really  effected  by  ordinary  means,  but 
since  it  was  of  a  difficult  and  perilous  character,  the  story  of  its  providential 
accompUshment  has  been  magnified.  The  narrative  itself  indicates  that  the 
river  was  fordable  by  the  spies  just  before.  Possibly  the  transit  of  the  host 
was  facilitated  by  some  fortunate  occurrence  which  temporarily  dammed  the 
stream,  such  as  a  landslip  on  its  upper  reaches  (an  instance  of  which  is  related 
to  have  happened  in  1267  A.D.). 

As  the  narrative  at  present  stands  in  Josh.  iii.  and  iv.,  two  memorials  of 
the  passage  of  the  river  were  set  up,  one  being  the  twelve  stones  placed  at 
Gilgal  on  the  W.  bank,  the  other  consisting  of  twelve  stones  erected  where, 
according  to  the  miraculous  account,  the  feet  of  the  priests  stood  still  in  the 
middle  of  the  parted  river.  But  the  narrative  is  confused,  and  is  probably 
compiled  from  two  sources,  containing  variant  traditions  of  a  single  memorial, 
though  the  LXX.  in  iv.  9  expressly  distinguishes  the  two  heaps  of  stones. 

The  account  of  the  circumcision  at  Gilgal  (v.  2-9)  is  rather  inconsistent. 
The  fact  that  the  rite  is  described  (ver.  9)  as  having  "  rolled  away  the  reproach 
of  Egypt,"  and  so  conferred  upon  Gilgal  its  name,^  implies  that  the  observance 
had  been  neglected  during  the  sojourn  in  that  country  (cf.  Ex.  iv.  24-26), 
which  would  account  for  the  uncircumcised  condition  of  the  children  born  in 
the  wilderness.  But  in  ver.  5  it  is  stated  positively  that  the  people  who  came 
out  of  Eg}-pt  were  circumcised,  in  which  case  it  is  difficult  to  understand  why 
they  did  not  circumcise  their  children.  The  LXX.  version  of  ver.  4-5  con- 
tradicts the  Heb. ,  and  (Hke  ver.  9)  represents  the  bulk  of  those  who  came  forth 
from  Egypt  as  uncircumcised. 

A  short  section  (v.  10-12)  derived  from  P  adds  to  the  account  of  the  inci- 
dents at  Gilgal  the  statement  that  the  Passover  was  kept  there  on  the  fourteenth 
day  of  the  month  Nisan  (only  four  days  after  the  passage  of  the  Jordan  (iv.  19), 
and  consequently  less  than  that  interval  after  the  circumcision),  on  which 
occasion  the  people  ate  for  the  first  time  of  the  corn  of  the  land,  and  the 
supply  of  manna  ceased  (c£  xvi.  35). 

From  Gilgal  an  advance  was  made  upon  Jericho.  The  terror 
which  prevented  the  inhabitants  from  disputing  the  passage  of 
the  river  was  not  Hkely  to  be  diminished  when  the  Israelites 
moved  to  the  assault  of  the  city;  and  though  some  resistance 

*  Barley  harvest  took  place  in  the  month  Abib  (cf.  p.  148),  which  afterwards 
received  the  name  of  Nisan,  and  was  reckoned  as  the  first  month  (cf.  iv.  19). 

'  From  galal  "  to  roll  ** ;  but  the  name  was  applied  to  more  than  one  place 
in  Canaan,  and  is  supposed  to  be  really  derived  from  the  existence  of  stone 
circles  in  the  neighbourhood. 


THE   CONQUEST   OF   CANAAN  173 

was  offered  (seejbsk.  xxiv.  11),  it  was  feeble  and  ineffective,  and 
the  place  fell  at  the  first  onset.  The  city  was  "devoted"  to 
Jehovah;  all  the  inhabitants  (except  the  woman  who  protected 
the  spies,  together  with  her  kinsfolk)  were  put  indiscriminately  to 
the  sword,  the  vessels  of  gold  and  silver,  brass  and  iron,  were 
taken  to  the  treasury  of  the  sanctuary,  the  walls  were  burnt  with 
fire,  and  a  curse  was  pronounced  upon  the  man  who  should  re- 
build it.  Later  generations  saw  in  the  calamities  which  befell  the 
family  of  a  certain  Hiel  the  fulfilment  of  the  curse  (i  Kg.  xvi.  34), 
but  as  mention  is  made  of  Jericho  between  the  times  of  Joshua 
and  Hiel  (see  2  Sam.  x.  5),  the  re-building  prohibited  probably 
meant  its  fortification. 

Before  the  capture  of  Jericho,  it  is  related  that  there  appeared  to  Joshua  a 
celestial  visitant  who  styled  himself  captain  of  the  host  of  Jehovah,  and  bade 
the  Israelite  leader  remove  his  shoes  from  off  his  feet,  for  the  place  whereon  he 
was  standing  (which  is  not  further  described)  was  holy  ground  [Josh.  v.  13-15). 
The  section  is  without  any  proper  conclusion ;  and  the  purpose  of  the  visit  is 
not  explained  unless  the  communication,  recorded  in  vi.  2  foil.,  was  made  by 
the  angel.  According  to  this  latter  passage,  which  directs  how  Jericho  was  to 
be  taken,  the  host  was  to  march  round  the  city  in  order,  the  procession  being 
headed  seemingly  by  the  contingent  from  the  tribes  of  Reuben  and  Gad 
(cf.  vi.  7  with  iv.  13),  these  being  followed  by  the  Ark  and  seven  priests  bear- 
ing and  blowmg  trumpets  of  rams'  horns,  and  the  rest  of  the  army  bringing 
up  the  rear  in  silence.  In  this  manner  they  were  to  compass  the  city  daily 
for  six  days,  and  on  the  seventh  day  were  to  make  the  circuit  seven  times ; 
whereupon  the  priests  were  to  blow  with  the  trumpets  and  the  people  were  to 
shout.  When  these  directions  were  duly  carried  out,  the  wall  of  the  city  is 
said  to  have  fallen  down  flat,  and  the  people  went  up  into  it,  every  man 
straight  before  him.  This  account  is  not  easily  reconciled  with  the  espial  of 
the  place,  recorded  in  c.  ii.  (which  could  only  be  preliminary  to  a  military 
assault  of  the  ordinary  character,  as  was  the  case  with  Ai  {Josh.  vii.  2)  and 
Bethel  {Jtid.  i.  23-24),  nor  with  the  mention  of  the  resistance  offered  by  the 
citizens  in  Josh,  xxiv.  1 1 ;  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  it  is  a  prosaic  rendering 
of  some  poetical  and  figurative  expression  (like  the  Greek  airopoel  e\eTv).  At 
the  same  time  it  is  possible  that  the  defences  of  Jericho  were  damaged  by  an 
earthquake  or  subsidence,  to  which  the  city,  from  its  position  near  the  Dead 
Sea,  was  probably  liable. 

After  the  capture  of  Jericho,  the  first  movement  of  the  Israelite 
host  was  an  advance  by  the  pass  of  Michmash  (the  JVddy 
Suweinit)  against  Ai,  a  town  a  little  to  the  east  of  Bethel. 
Spies  were  sent  forward  to  reconnoitre  the  situation  of  the 
place;  and  a  body  of  3,000  men  marched  to  assault  it.  But 
the  attack  was  a  failure ;  and  the  assailants  were  beaten  off  with 
loss.  The  cause  of  the  disaster  was  declared  to  be  the  con- 
tamination of  the  host  in  consequence  of  one  of  its  number 


174  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

having  appropriated,  in  the  capture  of  Jericho,  a  part  of  the 
spoil  which  had  been  "devoted"  to  Jehovah.  An  appeal  to 
the  lot  to  detect  the  criminaP  led  to  the  offence  being  laid  to 
the  charge  of  Achan,^  the  son  of  Carmi,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah. 
He  confessed  his  sin,  and  was  accordingly  put  to  death,^  to- 
gether with  his  family ;  and  thus  (as  was  believed)  the  fierceness 
of  Jehovah's  anger  was  turned  away  from  His  people.  The  scene 
of  Achan's  punishment  received  the  name  of  "the  valley  of 
Achor  "  (troubUng) ;  and  has  been  identified  with  the  JVddy  Kelt 
It  was  possibly  in  consequence  of  this  incident  that  the 
IsraeUte  forces  now  divided.  Tribal  feeling  was  still  very 
strong;*  and  though  policy  may  have  suggested  that  it  was 
expedient  for  the  nation  to  separate,  in  order  to  conquer  and 
occupy  the  country  in  detail,  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  assume 
that  other  motives  likewise  made  themselves  felt  at  this  juncture. 
Religious  fears  would  tend  to  deter  both  the  disgraced  tribe  from 
seeking,  and  the  rest  of  the  community  from  conceding  to  it, 
further  participation  in  the  attack  on  Ai;  and  it  must  have 
relieved  a  difficult  situation  when  a  decision  of  the  Divine  oracle 
at  the  sanctuary,  in  response  to  a  question  respecting  the  pro- 
secution of  the  war,  sent  Judah  upon  an  independent  campaign. 
Accordingly  that  tribe,  accompanied  by  Simeon,  and  joined  by 
a  number  of  Kenites  and  Kenizzites,^  left  the  main  body 
(probably  by  the  road  which  leads  from  the  Arabah  across  the 
Kidron  to  Bethl  them)  and  advanced  into  Judaea  {Jud.  i.  i6). 
There,  at  Bezek,^  they  defeated  and  captured  Adonizedek,^  king 

^  Cf.  /  Sam.  xiv.  ^i,/on.  L  7. 

2  Called  here  by  the  LXX. ,  by  Josephus,  and  by  the  Heb.  of/  Ck.  ii.  7,  Ackar, 

'  There  is  some  redundance  in  the  account  of  his  death  in  vii.  25.  The 
LXX.  only  has  iXieo^bXtiaav. 

*  As  the  subsequent  feud  respecting  Gibeah  further  illustrates ;  see  p.  191. 

^  Koiaz  was  an  Edomite  name  (see  Gen.  xxxvi.  11),  and  Edomite  names 
occur  amongst  Caleb's  sons  (cf.  /  Ch.  iv.  15  with  Gen.  xxxvi.  42,  i  Ch.  ii.  50 
with  Gen.  xxxvi.  20) ;  so  that  possibly  Caleb  was  not  of  Judsean  but  Edomite 
ancestry  (in  spite  of  /  Ch.  ii.  4,  5,  18). 

^  This  must  have  been  a  place  near  Jerusalem,  and  quite  distinct  from  the 
Bezek  of  /  Sam.  xi.  8. 

7  In  Jud.  i.  5  the  name  is  given  as  Adoni-bezek^  which,  in  connection  with 
the  place-name  Bezek,  would  seem  to  mean  "lord  of  Bezek."  But  adon  is  not 
generally  used  of  ownership,  and  mjosh.  x.  i  the  name  of  the  king  of  Jerusalem 
is  Adoni-xedek,  a  name  analogous  to  Adonijah^  if  Zcdek  can  be  assumed  to  be 
the  appellation  of  a  Canaanite  divinity. 


THE   CONQUEST  OF  CANAAN  175 

of  Jerusalem,  who  had  barbarously  mutilated  seventy  kings  that 
had  fallen  into  his  hands,  and  whom  the  victorious  Israelites 
treated  in  like  manner.  But  Jerusalem  itself  was  too  strong  to 
be  stormed,^  and  the  invaders  turned  from  it  towards  the  south. 
Kiriath  Arba  (or  Hebron),  a  city  inhabited  by  certain  Anakim, 
was  taken;  and  its  capture  was  followed  by  that  of  Kiriath 
Sepher  ^  or  Debir  (twelve  miles  to  the  S.W.  of  Hebron).  Zephath 
was  likewise  taken,  and  under  the  new  name  of  Hormah,^  fell 
to  the  lot  of  Simeon  {Jud.  i.  17,  Josh.  xix.  4).  A  descent  may 
likewise  have  been  made  into  the  maritime  plain ;  but  if  so  the 
invaders  could  not  establish  a  footing  in  it,*  the  open  country 
being  more  adapted  than  the  mountains  for  the  manoeuvring 
of  chariots  in  which  the  defenders  were  strong.  Of  the  successes 
just  described  a  large  share  was  due  to  Caleb  and  his  younger 
brother  (or  nephew)  Othniel.  To  the  latter  in  particular  the 
capture  of  Hebron^  and  Debir  is  attributed,  and  his  prowess 
was  rewarded  by  the  hand  of  Caleb's  daughter  Achsah,  to  whom 
her  father  gave  certain  springs  lying  between  the  two  cities. 

This  advance  of  Judah  and  Simeon  is  assigned  \n  Jud.  i.  i  to  a  date 
subsequent  to  the  death  of  Joshua.  But  Jtid.  c.  i  is  obviously  in  many 
respects  an  account  of  the  Conquest  parallel  to  certain  parts  of  the  book 
oi  Joshua,  relating  incidents  which  took  place  within  the  lifetime  of  Joshua. 
The  opening  statement  therefore  oi  Jtid.  c.  i.  must  be  a  mistake  as  regards 
the  contents  of  the  chapter  itself,  though  applicable  to  the  book  oi  Judges  as 
a  whole. 

Whilst  the  tribes  of  Judah  and  Simeon  were  thus  occupied, 
the  main  body  of  the  nation,  under  Joshua  in  person,  renewed 
the   attack   upon   Ai   with   fresh    hopes.      The    Israelites   were 

^  The  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  Judah  is  affirmed  \njud.  i.  8,  but  denied  in 
Josh.  XV.  63,  and  the  later  history  confirms  the  latter  (see  2  Sam.  v.  6).^  The 
city  was  really  in  the  territory  of  Benjamin  {Josh,  xviii.  28,  cf  Jtid.  i.  21). 
Josephus  {Ant.  v.  2,  2)  attempts  to  xeconcWe  Jtid.  i.  8  vi'iih.  Josh,  xv,  63  by 
supposing  that  the  lower  city  was  taken  whilst  the  upper  city  defied  capture ; 
but  in  vii.  3,  i  attributes  the  capture  both  of  the  lower  city  and  the  citadel  to 
David.  2  It  was  also  called  Kiriath  Sannah  {Josh.  xv.  49). 

^  Cf  Num.  xxi.  2-3  (see  p.  120),  where  Hormah  is  the  name  given  not  to 
Arad  but  to  the  scene  of  the  Canaanite  defeat  (presumably  Zephath). 

*  According  to  Jud.  i.  18  Judah  took  Gaza,  Ashkelon,  and  Ekron ;  but 
this  is  inconsistent  with  ver.  19,  iii.  3,  Josh.  xiii.  3,  and  the  LXX.  reads  oiiK 
iK\r]pov6iJ.r}<rev  loijdas  tt]v  Td^av  ktK. 

^  According  io  Josh.  xxi.  11-12  the  town  of  Hebron  was  given  to  the 
Levites,  and  only  the  fields  became  the  possession  of  Caleb.  But  the  existence 
of  Levitical  cities  at  this  period  is  more  than  questionable  (see  pp.  188-9). 


176  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

ill-equipped  for  the  assault  of  a  strongly-defended  fortress 
(cf.  Num.  xiii.  28),  and  recourse  was  had  to  stratagem.  A 
force  of  5,000  men  {Josh.  viii.  12)^  was  placed  in  ambush  on  the 
west  of  the  city,  between  it  and  Bethel;  whilst  Joshua  assailed 
it  with  the  rest  of  the  army  from  an  opposite  quarter.^  The 
latter  division,  feigning  defeat  in  the  engagement  that  followed, 
fled  in  the  direction  of  the  wilderness  leading  to  the  Arabah, 
pursued  by  the  inhabitants  of  Ai.  The  city  was  thus  left  open 
to  the  attack  of  the  ambuscade,  which  seized  the  place  and  set 
it  on  fire.  The  rising  smoke  gave  the  signal  to  Joshua  that  his 
stratagem  had  succeeded,  and  he  therefore  turned  upon  his 
pursuers  ;2  who,  as  the  ambush  issued  from  the  burning  city 
behind  them,  found  themselves  between  two  foes  and  were  cut 
to  pieces,  to  the  number  (it  is  said)  of  12,000.  The  king  of  Ai 
was  taken  prisoner  and  subsequently  hung,  the  remaining  popula- 
tion was  put  to  the  sword,  and  the  site  of  the  city  was  made 
a  desolation  ;*  but  its  spoil,  unlike  that  of  Jericho,  was  allowed 
to  be  appropriated  by  the  people.  The  neighbouring  town  of 
Bethel  (or  Luz)  ^  was  afterwards  captured  by  the  treachery  of  one 
of  its  own  people  {Jud.  i.  22-29),  ^"^  its  inhabitants  were 
massacred.  The  traitor,  like  Rahab  at  Jericho,  was  alone 
allowed  to  escape  with  his  family,  and  is  related  to  have  retired 
to  the  land  of  the  Hittites,  where  he  built  a  city  which  he  named 
after  his  old  home,  Luz.® 

^  In  viii.  3  the  number  is  given  (presumably  from  a  different  source)  as 
30,000,  which  is  out  of  all  proportion ;  cf.  vii.  3.  The  LXX.  has  the  same 
figure,  but  omits  the  5,000  of  ver.  12. 

"^  In  Josh.  viii.  1 1  the  Heb.  has  on  the  north  side  of  Ai^  but  the  LXX.  has 
dir'  a.varo\Q)V. 

'  In  the  account  a  discrepancy  is  observable  between  viii.  7-8,  21  and  ver. 
18-19,  26.  In  the  former  the  ambush,  by  setting  the  city  on  fire,  recalls 
Joshua  from  his  pretended  flight ;  in  the  second  Joshua,  whilst  fleeing  down 
the  Arabah,  gives,  by  stretching  out  his  rod,  the  signal  to  the  ambush  to  rise 
from  its  hiding-place. 

^  The  name  was  reproduced  in  the  later  Aiath  {Is.  x.  28),  but  the  locality 
of  the  new  city  may  have  been  different. 

•  Bethel  and  Luz  are  distinguished  m  Josh.  xvi.  2.  According  to  viii.  17 
the  citizens  of  Bethel  joined  in  the  pursuit  of  Israel  when  the  latter  feigned 
flight  before  Ai ;  but  as  the  ambush  was  placed  between  the  two  towns 
(ver.  12),  it  is  difficult  to  understand  how  they  could  do  this,  and  the  name  of 
Bethel  is  omitted  by  the  LXX. 

^  Its  site  is  very  uncertain,  but  is  by  some  identified  with  a  place  near 
Leshem  (or  Dan). 


THE  CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN  177 

In  dismay  at  these  successes  the  inhabitants  of  four  con- 
federate cities,  Gibeon,  Chephirah,  Beeroth,  and  Kiriath  Jearim^ 
(situated  to  the  S.  and  S.W.  of  Bethel)  sent  an  embassy  to 
Joshua  to  obtain  terms  of  peace.  It  is  related  that  they  pre- 
tended to  be  natives  of  a  distant  state,  and  supporting  their 
pretence  by  the  condition  of  their  clothes  and  provisions,  led  the 
Israelites  to  believe  that  they  lay  outside  the  Hmits  of  the  nations 
against  whom  they  were  directing  their  arms,  and  so  induced 
them  to  make  an  alliance  with  them.  That  such  an  alliance  was 
contracted  seems  indisputable,  whether  the  account  of  the  means 
adopted  to  secure  it  be  so  or  not;^  and  it  led  to  a  counter 
coalition  among  the  nearest  Amorite  peoples,  with  a  view  to 
punish  the  defection  of  the  Gibeonites,  and  to  repel  the  advance 
of  Israel.  The  Gibeonites,  as  soon  as  they  were  threatened, 
sent  for  aid  to  Joshua.  From  Gilgal,  which  served  as  a  per- 
manent camp,  the  Israelite  chief  proceeded  immediately  to  the 
relief  of  the  menaced  city,  and  a  great  battle  was  fought  hard  by 
it.  The  Amorites  were  defeated,  and  chased  in  part  along  the 
defile  of  Beth-horon  towards  Makkedah,  and  in  part  across 
the  hills  to  Azekah;^  and  a  terrible  hailstorm,  breaking  over 
the  flying  host,  increased  their  discomfiture.*  Their  kings  are 
said  to  have  taken  refuge  in  a  cave  at  Makkedah,^  where  they 

^  They  are  termed  Hivites  \nJosh.  xi.  19,  but  Amorites  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  2. 

'  That  terms  were  made  by  Israel  with  Gibeon  and  its  confederate  cities 
is  rendered  probable  by  the  succeeding  account  of  the  battle  of  Beth-horon 
(based,  seemingly,  on  the  Book  of  Jashar) ;  and  is  practically  placed  beyond 
doubt  by  the  narrative  of  the  expiation  made  in  the  reign  of  David  for  a  great 
wrong  done  to  them  by  Saul  {2  Sam.  c.  xxi.,  cf.  also  iv.  2-3).^  But  the 
representation,  mjosh.  ix.  21  foil.,  that  for  their  deceit  (as  related  in  the  text) 
they  were  reduced  immediately  to  serfdom  seems  inconsistent  with  the  isolated 
position  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  during  the  period  of  the  Judges,  which  is  only 
explicable  on  the  assumption  that  the  Gibeonite  cities  were  independent,  and, 
with  Jerusalem  and  Gezer,  formed  a  barrier  between  that  tribe  and  the  rest  of 
the  nation  (cf.  p.  184).  The  alleged  enslavement  of  the  Gibeonites  is  not  quite 
consistently  described.  In  ix.  15a,  22,  2^^  Joshua  makes  the  treaty  with  them, 
and  on  discovering  their  duplicity,  condemns  them  to  be  slaves  to  the  sanctuary^ 
whereas  in  15b,  21  i\\&  princes  contract  the  engagement,  and  afterwards  make 
the  Gibeonites  servants  of  the  congregation.  In  ver.  27  the  two  statements  are 
partially  fused  together. 

'  Usually  placed  near  the  valley  of  Elah  {Wddy  es  Sunt),  south  of  the 
valley  of  Aijalon,  within  which  Beth-horon  lay. 

*  For  a  hailstorm  causing  the  discomfiture  of  a  foe  cf.  /  Sam.  vii.  lo, 
Ps.  xviii.  13-14. 

»  In  the  Lowland  {Shephelah)  of  Judah  {Josh.  xv.  41). 
N 


1/8  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

were  detected  and  hanged ;  but  the  names  and  number  of  them, 
and  perhaps  even  the  scene  of  their  capture,  can  scarcely  be 
correctly  stated  in  the  account  that  records  their  overthrow. 

The  names  of  the  kings  who  attacked  Gibeon  and  were  defeated  by  Joshua 
are  given  in  Josh.  x.  as  Adonizedek^  of  Jerusalem,  Hoham  of  Hebron, 
Piram  of  Jarmuth,  Japhia  of  Lachish,  and  Debir  of  Eglon  ;^  and  their  defeat 
is  represented  as  being  followed  by  the  capture  and  overthrow  of  the  cities  of 
Makkedah,  Libnah,  Lachish,  Eglon,  Gezer,  Hebron,  and  Debir.  But  the 
first  four  of  these  cities  were  within,  or  on  the  edge  of,  the  maritime  plain, 
and  therefore  in  a  position  to  offer  a  successful  resistance  (cf.  Jiid.  i.  19); 
Gezer  is  stated  mjud.  i.  29  to  have  defied  capture  by  the  Ephraimites,  and 
it  did  not  become  an  Israelite  possession  until  the  time  of  Solomon 
(/  Kg.  ix.  16) ;  whilst  Hebron  and  Debir  are  related  to  have  been  assailed 
by  Judah  independently  of  Joshua  {/ud.  i.  8-13).  It  therefore  seems 
probable  that  the  names  both  of  the  cities  which  formed  the  confederacy 
against  Gibeon,  and  of  those  which  were  subsequently  captured  are  in- 
accurately given.  But  the  defeat  of  a  number  of  Amorite  kings  is  attested 
va.  Josh.  xxiv.  12  (where  the  LXX,,  instead  of  two^  reads  twelve) ;  whilst  an 
account  of  a  battle  at  Gibeon  was  contained  in  the  early  composition  called 
the  Book  of  Jashar  {Josh.  x.  12,  13) :  and  the  two  events  are  probably 
connected. 

In  the  Booh  of  Jashar  the  sun  and  moon  are  represented  poetically  as 
standing  still  in  their  course  at  Joshua's  prayer,  to  enable  Israel  to  have 
sufficient  light  to  complete  the  overthrow  of  their  enemies.^  The  language 
is  doubtless  to  be  understood  in  the  same  figurative  sense  as  the  similar 
expression  in  the  Song  of  Deborah  {Jtid.  v.  20,  cf.  Hab.  iii.  ii).  A  real 
lengthening  of  the  time  of  daylight  is,  under  the  circumstances,  incredible ;  and 
even  if  it  occurred,  could  scarcely  have  been  measured  by  people  whose  sole 
chronometer  was  the  sun  itself.  But  the  historian  oi Joshua  has,  in  x.  13,  14, 
interpreted  the  poet's  phraseology  literally,  and  has  been  followed  by  the 
author  of  Ecclus.  xlvi.  4. 

The  victory  gained  at  Gibeon  opened  up  the  centre  of  the 
country,  the  remnant  of  the  defeated  enemy  withdrawing  to  the 
shelter  of  their  fenced  cities  {Josh.  x.  20).  The  conquest  and 
occupation  of  mount  Ephraim,  which  was  allotted  to  the  tribe  of 
Joseph,  followed.  No  detailed  account  of  it,  however,  survives, 
though  some  of  the  kings  enumerated  in  Josh.  xii.  7-24  must 
have  been  encountered  in  the  course  of  the  campaign,  and  the 
possession  of  the  valley  between  Ebal  and  Gerizim  is  implied  in 
the  short  (and  misplaced)  section,  viii.  30-35.^     As  the  land  was 

*  LXX.  Adonibeuk  {ci.  Jud.  i.  5);  see  p.  174,  note. 
«  LXX.  Adullam. 

*  Cf.  the  lengthening  of  the  night  by  Athene  in  Horn.  Od.  xxiii.  241-246, 
and  the  shortening  of  the  day  by  Hera  in  //.  xviii.  239-242. 

*  The  succeeding  verses  ix.  1-2,  describing  a  confederacy  of  all  the  kings 
of  W.  Palestine,  is  also  out  of  keeping  with  the  context,  ix.  3  follows  on 
viii.  29. 


THE  CONQUEST  OF  CANAAN  179 

gradually  secured,  the  head-quarters  of  the  Israelite  army,  to- 
gether with  the  sanctuary,  were  removed  from  Gilgal  at  first 
(apparently)  to  Bethel  {Jud.  ii.  5,  LXX.,  of.  xx.  26-27),  ^"^^ 
finally  to  Shiloh. 

The  section  viii.  30-35,  which  is  isolated  from  its  context,  relates  that 
Joshua  erected  an  altar  on  Mt.  Ebal,  on  which  he  first  offered  sacrifices ;  and 
then  (apparently)  inscribed  upon  it  a  copy  of  the  law  of  Moses,  which, 
together  with  its  blessings  and  curses,  he  read  in  the  audience  of  the  tribes, 
who  were  placed  six  on  Mt.  Gerizim  and  six  on  Mt.  Ebal.^  The  erection  of 
the  altar  and  the  establishment  of  a  sanctuary  at  Shechem  in  the  valley 
between  the  two  hills  (cf.  xxiv.  i)  is  sufficiently  probable;  but  the  presence 
there  of  all  the  twelve  tribes  is  inconsistent  with  what  is  elsewhere  recorded 
of  the  independent  campaign  of  Judah  and  Simeon. 

Before  the  territory  in  the  north  could  be  secured,  another 
confederacy  had  to  be  faced.  The  king  of  Hazor^  (whose 
appellation  of  Jabin  is  probably  a  title  rather  than  a  proper 
name^),  supported  by  the  kings  of  Madon,  Shimron,  and 
Achshaph,^  with  others  who  are  described  as  the  kings  of  the 
Arabah  (south  of  the  Sea  of  Chinnereth),  of  the  hill-country 
(north  of  the  Plain  of  Esdraelon),  and  of  the  Lowland  (probably 
that  part  which  is  elsewhere  called  Sharon),  met  Joshua  near  the 
waters  of  Merom,  with  a  large  force  of  horses  and  chariots. 
Joshua  took  the  enemy  by  surprise,  and,  in  consequence, 
succeeded  in  defeating  them  with  great  loss.  The  chariots  that 
were  taken  in  the  battle  were  burnt,  and  the  horses  houghed. 
This  success  secured  for  Israel  a  footing  in  the  district.  Many  of 
the  towns  were  captured,  including  Hazor  (which  was  burnt), 
and  the  inhabitants  were  put  to  the  sword.  But  the  cities  which 
stood  on  fortified  mounds  defied  attack  {Josh.  xi.  13),  and  the 
subjugation  of  the  country  was  only  partial,  the  summaries  of 
Joshua's  conquests  (e.g.  Josh,  xii.),  which  represent  it  as  complete, 

^  The  proceedings  described  are  regarded  as  the  execution  of  the  command 
contained  in  Dcut.  xxvii.  2  foil. ,  but  there  it  is  directed  that  ( i )  the  law  is  to 
be  inscribed  not  on  the  altar  but  on  plastered  stones,  set  up  near  the  altar ; 
and  (2)  certain  curses  (and  not  the  whole  law)  are  to  be  read  to  the  people. 

'^  Hazor  was  near  Kedesh,  in  Naphtali,  a  little  to  the  W.  of  Lake  Merom. 

'  The  same  appellation  is  given  to  a  king  of  Hazor  in  the  time  of  the 
Judges  {Jud.  iv.  2). 

*  Shimron  was  near  Nazareth,  on  the  hills  N.W.  of  Esdraelon,  and  sub- 
sequently included  in  Zebulun.  Achshaph  was  near  the  port  of  Accho  in  the 
territory  assigned  to  Asher.  The  position  of  Madcn  (for  which  the  LXX. 
has  Mdppwj/,  i.e.  Merom)  is  uncertain,  but  is  placed  by  some  near  Lake  Merom, 
at  the  modern  Hattin, 


i8o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

being  contradicted  by  facts  noticed  elsewhere,^  and  describing  a 

state   of  affairs   which  did  not  exist  until   a  much  later  date. 

Nevertheless,  sufficient  had  been  achieved  to  allow  of  a  partition 

of  territory  among  the  various  Israelite  tribes.     Hitherto  Judah, 

Simeon,  and  Joseph  alone  had  received  possessions  on  the  W.  of 

Jordan,  but  the  time  had  now  come  for  the  others  to  have  their 

share.     Accordingly,  a  division  of  the  land  (presumably  of  a 

simple  and  tentative  character)  was  then  made,  and  the  different 

parts  allotted  at  the  sanctuary  at  Shiloh,  the  several  recipients, 

now  that  the  strength  of  the  Canaanites  was  broken,  being  left 

to  establish  themselves  in  their  respective  districts  by  their  own 

prowess. 

The  account,  inyosk.  xviii.  2-10,  of  a  survey  of  the  country  made  by  three 
men  from  each  of  the  tribes  that  were  awaiting  their  inheritance  presumes  a 
degree  of  tranquillity  which  can  scarcely  have  prevailed  as  yet ;  whilst  the 
statement  that  the  tribes  in  question  numbered  seven  is  inconsistent  with  the 
fact  that  Simeon,  which  has  to  be  included  to  make  up  the  figure,  had 
already  occupied  the  southern  district  in  conjunction  with  Judah  (see  p.  174). 

Of  the  territories  which  in  the  division  fell  to  the  several 
tribes,  the  following  is  a  brief  summary,  which  includes  for  the 
sake  of  completeness  the  possessions  of  Reuben  and  Gad  (who 
had  received  from  Moses  their  portions  on  the  E.  of  Jordan),  of 
Judah  and  Simeon  (who,  as  has  been  said,  had  established  them- 
selves in  the  south,  apart  from  the  main  body  of  the  nation),  and 
of  the  tribe  of  Joseph.  The  description  in  /osk.  xiii.-xix.  is 
derived  largely  from  the  Priestly  source,  and  doubtless  represents 
conditions  which  were  not  actually  realised  until  a  period  much 
later  than  the  age  of  the  Conquest.  In  the  case  of  most  of  the 
tribes  the  borders  are  traced  and  the  towns  are  enumerated  more 
or  less  fully ;  but  of  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  the  two  branches  of 
the  house  of  Joseph,  the  borders  only  are  given,  whilst  in  the 
instances  of  Simeon  and  Dan  nothing  but  a  list  of  cities  is 
furnished. 

Reuben,   according  to  /osk.  xiii.    15-22,  extended  from   the 

^  Of  the  thirty-one  cities  whose  kings  were  smitten  and  their  land  ap- 
propriated by  Joshua  (according  to  /osk.  xii.  7-24),  Taanach,  Megiddo,  Dor, 
and  Gezer  are,  in  J^ud.  i.  27-29,  expressly  named  as  being  places  whose  in- 
habitants were  not  dispossessed,  whilst  Jerusalem,  Hebron,  Debir  and  Zephath 
(Hormah)  were  attacked  not  by  Joshua  but  by  the  tribe  of  Judah  (cf.  p.  175). 

In  /osh.  xii.  23  the  LXX.  for  M*  ktH£^  of  Gciim  in  Gilgal^  reads  paci\4a 
Feci  TTjj  TaXiXo/aj. 


THE   CONQUEST   OF   CANAAN  i8i 

Arnon  (which  separated  it  from  Moab)  to  the  Wddy  IfesMdn — a 
ravine  running  E.  from  the  northern  extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea. 
In  JVum.  xxxii.  34-36,  however,  certain  cities  south  of  the  Wddy 
Heshbdn  are  related  to  have  been  built  by  Gad,  including  Dibon, 
Ataroth,^  Aroer,  and  Jazer,  though  others  within  the  same  district 
are  attributed  to  Reuben,  such  as  Heshbon,^  Elealeh,  Kiriathaim, 
Nebo,  and  Baal-meon.  It  seems  probable,  therefore,  that  in 
consequence  of  declining  numbers,  the  Reubenites  were  re- 
placed by  Gadites,  retaining  only  a  portion  of  the  region  origin- 
ally assigned  to  them. 

Gad,  according  to  the  description  of  Josh.  xvii.  24-28  (cf. 
Deut.  iii.  17),  extended  along  the  E.  bank  of  the  Jordan  from  the 
northern  end  of  the  Dead  Sea  to  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
Sea  of  Chinnereth,  the  eastern  border  touching  the  Ammonites 
at  Aroer  before  Rabbah.  It  thus  included  all  the  country  (Gilead) 
embraced  between  the  Wady  Heshban  and  the  Jarmuk,  its  territory 
taking  in,  among  other  towns,  the  city  of  Mahanaim.  But  it 
would  appear  that  the  country  north  of  the  Jabbok  was  eventually 
occupied  by  a  division  of  Manasseh,  who,  though  represented 
as  receiving  half  Gilead,  with  Bashan,  from  Moses  {Josh.  xiii.  31, 
Num.  xxxii.  40),  probably  crossed  thither  from  the  W.  of  Jordan 
at  a  much  later  period  (cf.  p.  205). 

Judah  had  all  the  district  W.  of  the  Dead  Sea,  its  southern 
border  extending  from  the  S.  end  of  the  Sea,  along  the  ascent  of 
Akrabbim  (which  separated  it  from  Edom),^  to  the  Brook  of 
Egypt^  (the  Wddy  el  Arish)  and  taking  in  Kadesh  Barnea,  whilst 
its  northern  border,  starting  from  the  mouth  of  the  Jordan, 
followed  the  valley  of  Achor  (the  Wddy  Kelt)  and  the  ascent  of 
Adummim*  to  Jerusalem,  and  then  keeping  to  the  south  of  the 
city,  passed  down  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  and  turning  westward, 
ran  along  the  valley  of  Sorek  (the  Wddy  Surar)  to  Jabneel. 

Simeon  received  a  district  within  the  territory  of  Judah,  Beer- 

*  Cf.  the  Moabite  Stone:— "The  men  of  Gad  had  dwelt  in  the  land  of 
Atarothfrom  of  old." 

^  In  Josh.  xxi.  39  Heshbon  is  regarded  as  belonging  to  Gad. 
^  In  Jud.  i.  36  for  Aviorites  read  Edomites   (LXX.  A  rov  Afxoppalov  6 
IdovfjLdios). 

*  The  Shihor  Qi  Josh.  xiii.  2. 

*  The  "  ascent  of  blood,"  between  Jericho  and  Jerusalem ;  cf.  S.  Luke  x.  30. 


i82  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

sheba,  Hormah,  and  Ziklag  being  its  most  important  towns.  As 
is  not  unnatural,  these  places,  with  a  number  of  others,  which  in 
Josh.  xix.  1-9  (cf.  I  Ch.  iv.  28-31)  are  assigned  to  Simeon,  are  in 
Josh.  XV.  20-63  included  amongst  the  possessions  of  Judah.^ 
The  cities  occupied  by  Simeon  were  principally  in  the  pasture 
lands  of  the  Negeb  (the  South). 

Joseph  (Epiiraim  and  Manasseh)  possessed  the  mountainous 
region  of  the  centre,  its  southern  border  running  from  Jericho 
through  Bethel  to  Beth-horon  the  nether,  and  down  the  valley  of 
Aijalon,  whilst  its  northern  frontier  reached  as  far  as  the  southern 
edge  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon  and  the  ridge  of  Carmel.^ 
Between  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  the  border  passed  from  Jericho 
in  a  N.W.  direction  through  Janoah  and  Michmethah  (near 
Shechem),  and  thence  to  the  brook  of  Kanah  (south  of  Tappuah), 
the  north  bank  of  the  brook  belonging  to  Manasseh  and  the 
south  to  Ephraim.^ 

Benjamin  lay  between  Judah  and  Joseph,  and  was  bordered  on 
the  E.  by  the  Jordan  and  on  the  W.  by  a  line  drawn  from  Beth- 
horon  to  Kiriath  Jearim. 

Dan  lay  to  the  W.  of  Benjamin,  commanding  the  approaches 
to  the  valleys  of  Aijalon  and  Sorek,  and  at  one  time  extended  to 
the  sea  {Jud.  v.  17).*  But  its  people  were  hard  pressed  by  the 
native  population  and  by  the  Philistines  on  their  borders,  and  a 
section  of  them  eventually  migrated  to  the  district  beyond  Lake 
Merom  (see  below,  pp.  183-4). 

Issachar  occupied  the  valley  of  Esdraelon,  the  triangular  plain 
lying  between  Tabor  and  the  hills  of  Nazareth,  the  range  of 
Carmel,  and  the  Jordan. 

Zebulun  lay  to  the  north  of  Issachar,  its  eastern  border  extend- 
ing from  the  hills  of  Nazareth  (on  the  south)  northwards  past 
Gath-hepher  as  far  as  Hannathon,  whence  the  northern  frontier 

^  In  /  Sam.  xxvii.  6  Ziklag  is  stated  to  have  come  into  the  possession  of 
Judah  in  the  time  of  David,  who  received  it  from  the  Philistines. 

2  Vxohdibly  the  hill  couniry  oi  Josh.  xvii.  18. 

'  The  land  of  Tappuah  belonged  to  Manasseh,  the  town  of  Tappuah  to 
Ephraim  ;  see  Josh.  xvii.  8. 

*  In  /osh.  XV.  33,  45  Eshtaol,  Zorah,  and  Ekron  are  assigned  to  Judah, 
but  in  xix.  41,  43  are  placed  in  the  border  of  Dan.  Ekron  was  really  a 
Philistine  city. 


THE    CONQUEST   OF   CANAAN  183 

ran  westward  down  the  valley  of  Iphtah-el  (the  Wady  el  Kurn). 
Its  western  border  is  not  given  in  Josh.,  but  according  to  Gen. 
xlix.  13  (cf.  Deut.  xxxiii.  18-19),  ^^  must  at  times  have  reached 
the  sea. 

Asher  held  the  maritime  plain  stretching  from  Carmel  in  the 
direction  of  Tyre  and  Zidon.  If  Zebulun  touched  the  sea,  the 
S.  border  of  Asher  was  probably  the  little  stream  Shihor-Hbnath 
{Beius),  N.  of  Carmel ;  but  if  Josh.  xvii.  1 1  means  that  Dor  was 
in  its  territory,  it  must  have  extended  S.  of  Carmel. 

Naphtali  was  N.  and  E.  of  Zebulun  and  E.  of  Asher,  reaching 
to  the  lake  of  Chinnereth  (the  sea  of  Deut.  xxxiii.  23  marg.)  and 
the  Jordan.^  On  the  N.  its  border  is  undetermined,  but  at  one 
time  it  included  the  towns  of  Ijon  and  Dan  (see  i  Kg.  xv.  20). 

The  above  description,  as  has  been  said,  is  derived  principally 
from  the  Priestly  source  of  the  Hexateuch,  and  is  doubtless  ideal- 
ised. At  any  rate,  the  ground  actually  occupied  at  the  Conquest 
was  much  less  than  is  here  implied.  In  the  first  place  the 
Israelites  quite  failed  to  establish  themselves  securely  in  the 
maritime  plain.  In  the  south-west,  Judah,  as  has  been  seen,  found 
its  advance  checked  by  the  five  Philistine  cities  ;  whilst  Ephraim 
could  not  expel  the  Canaanites  from  Gezer.  On  the  actual  sea- 
board Israel  could  make  still  less  impression.  In  the  north.  Dor, 
Achzib,  Acco,  Ahlab,  Helbah,  Aphik  and  Rehob,  though 
assigned  to  Asher,  remained  Canaanite  in  character  {Jud.  i.  31); 
and  Tyre  and  Zidon,  together  with  the  region  to  the  north  of  the 
latter,  were  quite  untouched  by  the  invasion.  Dan,  which,  like 
Asher,  is  represented  as  having  reached  the  sea,^  was  forced  back 
from  it  at  quite  an  early  date  by  the  Amorites,  so  that  a  detach- 
ment of  them  had  to  seek  a  new  home ;  and  a  detailed  account 
has  been  preserved  of  the  expedition  {Jud.  xviii.).  With  the  object 
of  finding  a   suitable   locality  for  a  settlement,  five  men  were 

^  The  meaning  of  the  statement  mjosk.  xix.  34  that  the  border  of  Naphtali 
reached  to  Jtidah  at  Jordan  is  uncertain.  Some  have  taken  the  words  to 
relate  to  the  district  E.  of  Jordan  occupied  by  Jair  and  his  descendants 
{Jud.  X.  4,  Num.  xxxii.  41),  Jair  drawing  his  lineage  on  one  side  from 
Hezron  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  (/  Ch.  ii.  18-22). 

^  The  ports  of  Palestine  were  never  permanently  in  the  hands  of  Israel. 
Even  Solomon  was  dependent  upon  the  navy  of  Tyre;  and  when  his  suc- 
cessors sought  an  outlet  to  the  sea,  it  was  to  Elath  in  Edom,  and  not  to  the 
harbours  of  Canaan  that  they  turned  their  attention. 


i84  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

despatched  to  survey  the  country,  and  these  while  passing  through 
the  hill-country  of  Ephraim  spent  a  night  at  the  house  of  a 
certain  Micah,  who  had  made  an  image  of  Jehovah  and  an  ephod 
(which  was  the  usual  medium  for  procuring  Divine  responses), 
and  had  also  obtained  a  Levite,  Jonathan,  the  grandson  of 
Moses,^  to  act  as  priest.  The  spies,  encouraged  by  the  Levite 
with  hopes  of  success,  proceeded  to  the  northern  extremity  of 
the  land,  and  found  that  the  city  of  Laish^  or  Leshem  {Josh.  xix. 
47),  a  place  whose  inhabitants  were  traders  like  the  Zidonians, 
was  peaceful  and  isolated  enough  to  offer  an  easy  prey.  In 
consequence  of  the  report  which  they  brought  home,  600  men 
left  to  attack  it.  On  their  way  they  induced  the  Levite  to 
accompany  them,  and  he  carried  off  with  him  Micah's  graven 
image  and  ephod,  which  their  owner  was  unable  to  recover. 
When  arrived  at  Laish,  they  assaulted  it,  massacred  the  inhabi- 
tants, and  burnt  the  city;  and  then  settling  on  the  spot,  they 
called  the  new  city  which  they  built  after  the  name  of  their 
ancestor  Dan.  With  the  help  of  the  Levite,  and  what  he  had 
brought  with  him,  a  sanctuary  was  established  there  which  was 
long  frequented.^  But  in  addition  to  instances  like  those  just 
mentioned,  in  which  the  natives  retained,  or  recovered,  possession 
of  the  coast  and  the  district  adjoining,  there  were  in  two  places 
groups  of  inland  towns  left  in  their  hands,  which  isolated  the 
Israelite  tribes  from  one  another,  and  seriously  hindered  the 
growth  of  national  sentiment.  On  the  frontiers  of  Judah  the 
strong  citadel  of  Jerusalem  was  still  occupied  by  the  Jebusites, 
and  with  the  four  Gibeonite  towns  and  the  fortresses  of  Aijalon, 
Shaalbim,  and  Gezer,  so  effectually  cut  off  Judah  from  the  rest  of 
the  nation  that  it  hardly  fills  any  place  in  the  history  of  the  period 
immediately  succeeding  the  Conquest,  and  is  not  named  among 
the  tribes  alluded  to  m  the  Song  of  Deborah  {Jud.  c.  v.).   Again, 

^  Another  reading  in  the  Heb.,  which  also  occurs  in  the  LXX.,  is  Manasseh 
— probably  an  intentional  alteration. 

^  Situated  a  little  N.  of  Lake  Merom,  near  the  base  of  Hermon — the 
modern  Tell  el  Kadi,  or  according  to  others,  Banias. 

^  The  captivity  of  the  land  {Jud.  xviii.  30)  is  probably  that  of  Northern 
Galilee  in  734  B.C.  {2  Kg.  xv.  29),  or  that  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  in  722. 
In  ver.  31,  another  limit  of  time  is  implied,  viz.  the  destruction  of  the  sanctuary 
at  Shiloh  by  the  PhiHstines  in  the  time  of  Eli  (see  p.  211). 


THE  CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN  185 

north  of  Manasseh  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  the  cities  of  Beth- 
shan,  Ibleam,  Endor,  Taanach,  and  Megiddo  formed  a  second 
Canaanite  belt  across  the  country,  dividing  the  northern  tribes 
from  the  central  {Jud.  i.  27,  cf.  Josh.  xvii.  16).  Moreover,  the 
region  in  which  the  northern  tribes  settled  was  very  incompletely 
subdued,  and  many  of  the  towns  in  Zebulun  and  Naphtali 
(Kitron,  Nahalol,  Beth-shemesh,  Beth-ana th)  as  well  as  in  Asher, 
remained  in  the  occupation  of  the  former  inhabitants  {Jiid.  i.  30- 
33),  Indeed,  the  non-Israelite  population  in  this  district  was  so 
numerous  that  it  came  to  be  known  as  "  the  circle  (Galilee)  of  the 
nations."  Hazor,  which  had  been  taken  and  burnt  {Josh.  xi.  11), 
again  became  the  seat  of  a  powerful  Canaanite  kingdom,  its 
authority  at  one  time  extending  even  to  Esdraelon  {Jud.  c.  iv.). 

As  has  been  already  related,  both  at  the  outset  of  the  invasion 
and  after  the  decisive  battle  near  Lake  Merom,  the  choice  of  the 
regions  to  be  reduced  and  appropriated  by  the  several  tribes  was 
determined  by  lot.  But  fluctuations  in  the  relative  strength 
of  the  tribes,  together  with  other  causes,  inevitably  led  to  many 
places  changing  owners.  Thus  Jerusalem  was  first  attacked  by 
Judah,  but  afterwards,  with  the  exception  of  the  citadel,  was 
included  in  Benjamin.  The  Canaanites  of  Shaalbim  and 
Aijalon,  whom  the  Danites  had  been  unable  to  expel,  were 
eventually  reduced  to  the  condition  of  tributaries  by  Ephraim 
{Jud.  i.  34,  35).  Ephraim  also  became  possessed  of  certain 
cities  in  the  territory  of  Manasseh  {Josh.  xvii.  8-9,  cf.  xvi.  9). 
In  turn,  Manasseh  obtained  the  land  in  the  immediate  vicinity 
of  the  Canaanite  towns  in  Esdraelon  already  mentioned,  though 
this  was  originally  allotted  to  Issachar  and  Asher  {Josh.  xvii.  11). 
The  two  tribes  of  Joseph  were  at  this  period  and  for  some  time 
afterwards  the  most  powerful  in  Israel;  and  though,  when  they 
found  the  hill  country  too  narrow  for  them,  they  professed  to  be 
unable  to  occupy  the  valleys  because  of  the  presence  of  the 
Canaanites  there  {Josh.  xvii.  14-18),  they  really  seem  to  have 
done  so  to  some  extent.  But  it  is  probable  that  the  restrictions 
caused  by  the  existence  of  the  Canaanite  towns  in  their  neigh- 
bourhood led  both  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  to  send  detachments 
of  settlers  across  the  Jordan.  A  section  of  Manasseh  certainly 
came  to  be  established  on  the  E.  of  the  river  (Num.  xxxii.  39), 


i86  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  from   the  fact    that    the    Gileadites    could    be  tauntingly 

described  as  fugitives  from  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  {Jud,  xii.  4), 

and  that  a  wood  in  Gilead  was  called  "  the  forest  of  Ephraim " 

{2  Sam.  xviii.  6),  it  may  be  concluded  that  a  body  of  Ephraimites 

was  also  located  there. 

In  Num.  xxxii  39-40  possessions  in  Gilead  are  represented  as  given  to 
Machir,  the  son  (  =  descendant)  of  Manasseh,  by  Moses.  But  in  Deborah's 
time  {Jt*d.  v.  14)  Machir  was  W.  of  the  Jordan  ;  and  it  seems  probable  that 
the  migration  of  part  of  Manasseh  to  Gilead  took  place  in  the  time  of  Jair, 
who  judged  Israel  subsequently  to  Deborah  {Jttd.  x.  4,  cf.  Num.  xxxiL  41). 

That  the  acquisition  of  Canaan  W.  of  the  Jordan  was  not 
accomplished  solely  by  force  may  be  inferred  from  some  of  the 
facts  already  indicated  (in  spite  of  the  statement  in  Josh.  xi.  19). 
Doubtless  in  many  places  which  Israel  carried  at  the  point  of  the 
sword,  the  native  inhabitants  were  entirely  exterminated  from 
motives  alike  of  religion  and  expediency.  But  in  districts  where 
Israel  was  unable  to  assert  an  armed  superiority,  the  only  way 
to  secure  a  settlement  was  by  peaceable  arrangement  Even 
in  Shechem,  in  a  neighbourhood  where  Israelite  ascendency  was 
assured,  a  considerable  Canaanite  population  existed  in  the  time 
of  Gideon  and  his  son  Abimelech  {/ud.  c.  ix).^  Social  relations 
must  soon  have  arisen  between  the  two  peoples;  and  to  the 
practice  of  intermarriage  which  began  to  prevail  are  ascribed,  in 
the  history  of  the  subsequent  period,  the  calamities  which  from 
time  to  time  visited  Israel  {/i^d.  iii.  5-6).  The  unions  between 
the  two  sons  of  the  Judahite  Elimelech  and  two  women  of  Moab 
{Ruth  c.  L),  between  Ruth  (one  of  the  latter)  and  Boaz,  between 
Samson  and  a  woman  of  the  Philistines,  were,  no  doubt,  not 
exceptional.  And  in  later  times  there  must  have  been  many 
in  Israel  who  hke  Amasa  (whose  father  was  an  Ishmaelite, 
I  Ch.  ii.  17)  and  Hiram  (whose  father,  according  to  one  account, 
was  a  man  of  Tyre,  i  Kg.  vii.  14),  were  only  half-Israelite  in 
point  of  parentage.  Such  intermingling  of  the  two  races,  if  it 
had  its  pernicious  side,  had  also  more  favourable  consequences. 
Israel  must  have  gained  thereby  not  only  in  numbers  but  also 
in  the  arts  of  civilisation ;  and  it  was  partly  due  to  such  a  fusion 

^  Even  in  the  time  of  Rehoboam  a  large  native  element  still  existed,  for 
the  faces  carved  by  the  Egyptian  Shishak  above  the  inscription  celebrating 
his  conquest  over  Judah  (/  Kg.  xiv.  25)  are  said  to  have  the  features  of 
Amorites  (Sayce,  Races  of  the  0,T.t  p.  75). 


THE   CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN  187 

that  in  the  age  of  David  it  became  far  more  than  a  match  for  its 
neighbours  of  Philistia,  Moab,  and  Ammon. 

But  if  the  establishment  of  Israel  in  Canaan  followed  the  lines 
described,  it  must  have  been  a  very  protracted  process.^  The 
actual  conquest  of  the  E.  of  Jordan,  and  the  other  operations 
which  preceded  the  occupation  by  Caleb  of  Hebron,  covered 
seven  years  j^  and  the  task  of  subjugating  the  W.  of  Jordan  in 
general  probably  extended  beyond  the  lifetime  of  Joshua.  The 
work  of  the  latter,  indeed,  was  less  the  appropriation  of  the  land 
of  the  Canaanites  than  the  conduct  of  the  initial  campaign  which 
rendered  such  appropriation  possible.  He  succeeded  in  doing 
what  had  been  attempted  in  vain  in  the  previous  generation,  and 
by  his  skilful  generalship  at  the  outset  the  eventual  mastery  of 
the  country  was  in  consequence  assured.  In  certain  portions, 
indeed,  of  the  book  that  bears  his  name,  the  part  which  he 
played  at  the  beginning  he  is  represented  as  sustaining  through- 
out ;  and  the  conquest  of  Judaea  is  attributed  to  him  equally  with 
that  of  other  parts  of  the  country  {Josh.  x.  36-43).  This,  how- 
ever, must  be  unhistorical ;  for  after  the  abortive  attack  upon  Ai, 
Judah  and  Simeon  passed  from  under  his  personal  direction. 
In  the  course  of  time  his  position  must  have  undergone  further 
change,  as  the  several  tribes  moved  off  to  secure  the  ground 
which  his  victories  had  opened  up;  and  his  direct  authority, 
which  at  first  had  embraced  the  united  people,  would  more  and 
more  become  narrowed  down  to  his  own  tribe  of  Ephraim.  But 
though  some  of  the  achievements  attributed  to  Joshua  were  not 
really  accomplished  by  his  personal  exertions  or  even  under  his 
auspices,  the  chief  credit  of  the  Conquest  none  the  less  belongs 
to  him;  and  he  shares  with  Moses  and  David  the  glory  of 
having  acquired  for  Israel  a  place  and  name  among  the  nations 
of  the  earth. 

How  long  Joshua  lived  after  the  division  of  the  land  is 
uncertain.  Of  the  incidents  which  are  recorded  of  the  closing 
years  of  his  history  some  appear  to  be  occurrences  which  should 
have  happened  (in  the  opinion  of  later  times)  rather  than  actually 
did   happen,    those  which   seem  to   be   really  historical  being 

^  Seey<?jA.  xi.  i8,  and  cf.  Ex.  xxiii.  29-30,  Deut.  vii.  22. 
'  StQjosh.  xiv.  7-10,  Deut.  ii.  14. 


i88  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

comparatively  few.  As  soon  as  the  strength  of  the  Canaanite 
resistance  was  broken,  the  contingents  of  Reuben  and  Gad  were 
dismissed  to  their  homes ;  and  on  their  way  thither  they  built  by 
the  Jordan  1  an  altar,  the  erection  of  which  is  asserted  (rather 
improbably)  to  have  nearly  embroiled  the  Eastern  and  Western 
tribes  in  a  fratricidal  quarrel.  Joshua,  as  he  saw  the  end  of 
his  life  approaching,  assumed  once  more  the  character  and 
fu.ictions  of  a  national  leader;  and  before  his  death  he  sum- 
moned to  Shechem^  the  heads  and  officials  of  the  tribes  and 
delivered  to  them  a  parting  address.  In  this  he  reviewed  the 
past  history  of  the  nation,  pointed  out  the  signal  triumphs  which 
Jehovah  had  won  for  them,  and  exhorted  them  to  serve  Him,  and 
Him  alone.  The  people  made  a  covenant  to  do  this,  and  Joshua 
set  up  a  stone  under  the  oak  near  the  sanctuary  as  a  witness. 
He  died  shortly  afterwards,  and  was  buried  in  his  inheritance  at 
Timnath-Serah  (called  Timnath-heres  \\\  Jud.  ii.  9),  in  mount 
Ephraim.  His  death  was  followed  by  that  of  Eleazar,  who  was 
buried  at  Gibeah  of  Phinehas  {Josh.  xxiv.  33  marg.),  likewise  in 
mount  Ephraim.  The  bones  of  Joseph  which  had  been  brought 
out  of  Egypt  were  buried  at  Shechem,  so  that  the  tribes  of 
Joseph  became  the  possessors  of  the  tomb  of  their  ancestor. 

In  Josh.  XX.,  xxi.  it  is  related  that  after  the  land  was  divided  between  the 
tribes,  Joshua  determined  what  towns  should  be  [a)  assigned  for  the  support 
of  the  Priests  and  Levites ;  {b)  designated  as  Cities  of  Refuge  (see  Num. 
XXXV. )  There  were  appointed  [a)  for  the  Priests  and  Levites  forty-eight  towns 
— thirteen  in  Judah,  Simeon,  and  Benjamin  for  the  Priests,  the  sons  of  Aaron, 
ten  in  Ephraim,  Dan,  and  Western  Manasseh  for  the  rest  of  the  Kohathites ; 
thirteen  in  Issachar,  Asher,  Naphtali,  and  Eastern  Manasseh  for  the 
Gershonites ;  and  twelve  in  Reuben,  Gad,  and  Zebulun  for  the  Merarites : 
(b)  as  Cities  of  Refuge  six  towns — Kedesh  in  Naphtali,  Shechem  in  the  hill 
country  of  Ephraim,  Kiriath-Arba  (Hebron)  in  Judah,  Bezer  in  Reuben, 
Ramoth  Gilead  in  Gad,  and  Golan  in  E.  Manasseh.  The  account  comes 
from  P,  with  insertions  from  D  ;^  and  the  contents  are  improbable  because 
(i)  the  distinction  drawn  between  the  sons  of  Aaron  and  the  rest  of  the 

^  The  site  of  the  altar  is  uncertain,  xxii.  10  places  it  on  the  W.  of  the 
Jordan,  and  the  Heb.  of  ver.  ii  seems  to  admit  of  this,  but  the  LXX.  of 
ver.  II  places  it  on  the  E.,  which  is  the  most  natural  situation. 

^  The  LXX.  in  xxiv.  i,  25  has  Shiloh,  adding  in  ver.  25,  'evdymov  rijs  ffKijvrjs 
Tov  deov  'laparjX, 

'  Since  Deuteronomy  is  generally  regarded  as  earlier  than  the  Priestly  code 
(see  Introd.  p.  7),  the  insertion  of  passages  from  Deut.  into  this  section  must 
be  the  work  of  a  late  scribe  ;  the  passages  in  question  do  not  occur  in  the 
earliest  MS.  of  the  LXX. 


THE   CONQUEST   OF  CANAAN  189 

Levites  seems,  from  indications  in  the  historical  books,  to  have  been  much 
later  than  Joshua's  time ;  (2)  Judah  and  Simeon  were  at  this  date  separated 
from  the  rest  of  the  tribes,  and  Manasseh  had  probably  not  yet  crossed  from 
the  W.  to  the  E.  of  Jordan  ;  (3)  many  of  the  cities  represented  as  assigned  to 
the  Levites  were  still  in  the  hands  of  the  Canaanites  {e.g.  Gezer,  Taanach, 
Rehob,  Nahalol,  see  Jud.  i.  27-32).  It  is  also  noteworthy  that  Phinehas, 
who  as  a  priest  should  have  had  a  share  in  the  cities  allotted  to  the  sons  of 
Aaron  in  Judah,  Simeon,  and  Benjamin  {Josh.  xxi.  4),  is  represented  in/osh. 
xxiv.  33  (JE)  as  possessing  Gibeah  of  Phinehas  in  Ephraim,  which  is  not 
included  among  the  cities  in  that  tribe  which  were  granted  to  the  descen- 
dants of  Levi. 

The  section  (c.  xxii. )  which  contains  the  narrative  of  the  altar  erected  by 
the  two  eastern  tribes  on  going  to  their  homes  likewise  appears,  from  its 
linguistic  colouring  and  its  spirit,  to  be  derived  from  P.  It  represents  that 
the  altar  in  question  was  thought  by  the  western  tribes  to  be  intended  as 
another  sanctuary  instead  of,  or  in  addition  to,  Shiloh,  and  relates  that 
Phinehas  was  sent  by  them  to  remonstrate  before  they  proceeded  to  ex- 
tremities. The  eastern  tribes  explained  that  the  altar  was  not  meant  as 
a  place  of  sacrifice,  but  to  witness  (by  its  shape),  in  case  the  western  tribes 
disallowed  their  claim  to  religious  communion,  that  they  were  worshippers  of 
Jehovah.  The  altar,  in  consequence,  was  called  Ed.^  The  belief,  however, 
implied  by  the  narrative,  that  no  altar  could  be  used  for  sacrifice  except  the 
one  before  the  Tabernacle  is  inconsistent  alike  with  the  practice  of  Joshua 
himself  {Josh.  viii.  30  foil.)  and  that  of  the  ages  immediately  following  his 
time.  But  it  is  not  improbable  that  an  altar  was  really  erected,  under  the 
circumstances  described,  by  the  returning  tribes,  the  existence  of  which 
seemed  to  later  generations  to  require  an  explanation. 

Of  Joshua's  last  speech  there  seem  to  be  two  versions  {Josh,  xxiii.  and 
xxiv.),  of  which  the  second  has  the  best  authority  behind  it,  being  derived 
from  JE,  whereas  the  first  is  composed  in  the  style  and  spirit  of  Deui. 
Even  in  the  version  contained  in  c.  xxiv.  there  appear  to  be  insertions  in  the 
Deuteronomic  manner  {e.g.  ver.  13,  cf.  Deut.  vi.  lo-ii);  and  the  statement 
that  Joshua  wrote  the  words  of  the  covenant  in  the  book  of  the  Law  (ver.  26) 
has  likewise  been  suspected  to  be  an  interpolation,  such  a  proceeding  seeming 
to  be  out  of  keeping  with  the  stage  of  thought  and  custom  implied  in  the 
erection  of  a  stone  to  serve  as  a  witness.     Yet  cf.  Ex.  xvii.  14-16. 

^  In  Josh.  xxii.  34  there  is  a  lacuna  which  requires  some  such  insertion. 
The  word  means  witness. 


CHAPTER   VII 
THE    JUDGES 

Sources— y«//.  iii.  7-xxi.  25,  7  Sam.  i.  i-vii.  i. 

JOSHUA,  as  has  been  said,  was  one  of  the  three  men  who 
made  Israel  a  nation.  Under  his  leadership,  the  wanderers 
of  the  desert,  full  of  tribal  jealousies,  and  hitherto  little  accus- 
tomed to  concerted  action,  were  compacted  into  a  body 
sufficiently  united  and  powerful  to  be  more  than  a  match  for 
the  forces  of  the  Canaanites.  But  he  left  no  successor  to 
command  the  obedience  of  all  Israel;  nor,  indeed,  under  the 
new  conditions  in  which  the  people  found  itself,  was  its  compre- 
hension under  a  single  head  as  yet  feasible.  Even  during  Joshua's 
lifetime  certain  of  the  tribes  acted  independently  of  him ;  and 
when  he  passed  away,  such  combination  as  his  military  operations 
enforced  tended  to  disappear  as  the  different  sections  separated 
to  appropriate  their  respective  acquisitions,  and  gave  place  to 
a  narrow  and  self-assertive  tribal  spirit.  And  this  proneness 
to  a  self-regarding  policy  was  aggravated  in  the  case  of  some 
by  the  situation  in  which  they  were  placed  in  consequence  of 
the  imperfect  subjugation  of  the  country.  The  nascent  senti- 
ment of  nationalism  drooped  when  the  outlying  tribes,  on  the 
one  hand,  saw  themselves  menaced  by  strong  Canaanite 
fortresses,  and  on  the  other  hand,  felt  themselves  attracted  by 
the  luxurious  Canaanite  civilisation.  Of  the  weakness  which 
this  partly  inevitable  partly  self-chosen  isolation  produced  the 
surrounding  communities  quickly  took  advantage,  the  vanquished 
Canaanites  trying  to  regain  the  soil  they  had  lost,  and  the 
Ammonites  and  Moabites,  as  well  as  the  desert  tribes  (like 
Midian),  seeking   to   share   the   territory   which    their   Israelite 

190 


THE  JUDGES  191 

kindred  had  won.  Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  heathen  seduction 
and  heathen  assaults,  neither  the  purer  faith  and  morality 
inseparable  from  the  religion  of  Jehovah,  nor  the  consciousness 
of  national  claims  due  to  a  common  ancestry,  was  altogether 
quenched.  Though  for  a  time  submerged,  they  constantly 
reasserted  themselves;  and  consequently  the  period  that  now 
comes  under  notice  was  one  of  alternate  disaster  and  recovery, 
both  moral  and  material;  and  the  uninterrupted  successes  of 
the  book  oi  Joshua  give  place  to  the  chequered  history  contained 
in  Judges. 

The  complex  character  and  temper  of  the  age — the  corruption 
of  manners  met  by  indignant  protests,  and  the  jealous  tribal 
spirit  brought  into  conflict  with  a  nobler  sense  of  national  duty 
— finds  illustration  in  an  early  incident  which  took  place  in 
connection  with  Gibeah,  a  town  of  Benjamin.  A  Levite, 
dwelling  on  the  north  of  mount  Ephraim,  had  gone  to 
Bethlehem  in  Judah  to  recover  his  concubine,  who  had  with- 
drawn to  her  home  there ;  and  on  his  returning  to  his  own  house 
{Jud.  xix.  18  marg.,  cf.  ver.  9)  he  found  it  necessary  to  pass 
the  night  at  Gibeah  (in  preference  to  Jerusalem  which  was  still 
in  the  hands  of  the  Jebusites).  There  the  woman  was  so  grossly 
outraged  that  she  died;  and  the  Levite,  when  he  reached  his 
home,  appealed  to  the  nation  at  large  to  avenge  the  crime.  But 
when  a  force  was  gathered  and  demanded  the  surrender  of  the 
criminals,  the  Benjamites  refused  to  deliver  them  up ;  and  a  war 
ensued  in  which  Benjamin  eventually  lost  heavily.  The  narrative 
represents  that  the  plight  of  the  survivors  of  the  offending  tribe 
was  rendered  still  worse  by  an  oath,  taken  by  the  rest  of  the 
Israelites,  that  they  would  not  give  their  daughters  in  marriage 
to  Benjamin;  but  to  avoid  the  extinction  of  the  tribe,  recourse 
was  had  to  two  devices.  In  the  first  place,  Jabesh  Gilead,  a  city 
which  had  not  contributed  any  forces  to  the  combined  Israelite 
army,  was  captured  and  destroyed,  and  its  unmarried  women 
were  bestowed  on  the  Benjamites;  whilst,  secondly,  all  who 
were  not  thus  provided,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  rest  of  the 
tribes,  carried  off  the  virgins  of  Shiloh  when  gathered  together  at 
a  vintage  festival. 


192  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

The  incident  of  Gibeah  is  referred  to  in  Hos.  ix.  9,  x.  9,  as  a  well-known 
event  in  the  nation's  history;  and  its  early  date  is  determined  by  the  statement 
that  Phinehas  the  grandson  of  Aaron  was  priest  at  the  time  {Jud.  xx.  27). 
But  the  account  of  it  in  its  present  form  appears  from  its  phraseology  to  be 
late,^  and  though  true  in  substance,  has  been  idealised,  especially  in  respect  of 
the  unanimity  prevailing  amongst  the  tribes  in  general,  the  position  assigned 
to  Judah  (xx.  18),  at  this  time  isolated,  and  the  enormous  number  of  the 
forces  engaged  (400,000  foot  from  the  eleven  tribes,  and  26,700  (or  according 
to  another  reading,  25,700)  from  Benjamin).'^  It  is  also  noteworthy  that 
Jabesh  Gilead,  which  is  represented  as  totally  destroyed,  was  a  prominent  city 
in  the  reign  of  Saul  (/  Satri.  xi.). 

In  the  absence  of  any  paramount  authority  in  succession  to 
Joshua,  the  government  of  the  people  must  have  rested  solely 
with  the  heads  of  the  various  tribes  and  of  the  several  families 
composing  them  {oS..  Josh.  xxiv.  i^Jud.  ii.  7).  And  so  long  as  the 
Israelites  were  left  in  the  undisturbed  possession  of  the  territories 
which  they  had  acquired,  this  tribal  and  patriarchal  type  of  rule 
was  doubtless  sufficient  for  their  needs.  But  as  soon  as  external 
enemies  began  to  assail  them,  and  the  Canaanites  made  attempts 
to  recover  their  losses,  the  necessity  of  better  organisation  became 
urgent.  But  capacity  for  political  organisation  was  a  quality  in 
which  the  Hebrews,  seemingly  in  common  with  some  other  of  the 
Semitic  races,  appear  to  have  been  deficient.  Under  pressure  of 
danger  they  could  form  temporary  confederations  which  fell 
asunder  as  soon  as  the  danger  was  removed,  but  they  were  slow 
to  enter  into  closer  and  more  permanent  combinations.  In  this 
respect  the  Israelites,  who  were  just  passing  from  the  nomadic  to 
the  agricultural  stage  of  society,  were  behind  their  kinsmen  of 
Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon,  all  of  whom  had  kings  before  them 
(see  Gen.  xxxvi.  7^i,/ud.  iii.  12,  xi.  12).  Consequently,  when  an 
uprising  of  the  Canaanites  or  an  invasion  on  the  part  of  nations 
outside  Canaan,  rendered  it  necessary  to  unite  for  the  purpose  of 

^  The  expressions  congregation  and  wickedness  (or  lewdness)^  both  of  which 
occur  in  c.  xx.,  xxi.  (see  xx.  i,  6,  xxi.  10,  13,  16),  are  especially  charac- 
teristic of  the  Priestly  code  of  the  Hexateuch  (see  p.  5,  note). 

2  In  Jud.  XX.  there  is  considerable  repetition,  ver.  30-36a  and  361>-46 
being  duplicates.  If  twenty  and  six  thousand  be  the  correct  reading  in  ver.  15, 
the  first  of  these  two  versions  must  have  represented  the  survivors  of  Benjamin 
at  1600  (see  ver.  35)  instead  of  the  600  of  the  second  version  (ver.  47). 

If  the  fighting  force  were  one-eighth  of  the  total  population,  the  figures 
given  would  imply  that  the  Israelites  at  this  time  numbered  between  3,000,000 
and  4,000,000 ;  whereas  even  Wales  had  at  the  last  census  a  population  of 
not  quite  a  million  and  three-quarters. 


THE  JUDGES  193 

defence  they  were  dependent  for  leadership  upon  the  valour  and 
conduct  of  those  individuals  whom  native  ability  and  good 
fortune  brought  to  the  front.  The  influence  which  these  leaders 
exercised  rested  mainly  upon  their  personal  qualities  and  not 
upon  any  prescriptive  rights  or  even  public  sanction ;  and  must 
have  varied  both  with  their  individual  capacities  and  the  con- 
ditions that  evoked  them.  Those  whom  the  exigencies  of  the 
times  thus  invested  with  power  were  designated  by  the  already 
existing  title  of  judges  (see  Num.  xxv.  5),  though  the  signifi- 
cance which  now  became  attached  to  the  name  was  that  of 
deliverer  rather  than  administrator  of  justice. 

The  authority  of  the  Judges  was  naturally,  from  the  circum- 
stances of  their  origin,  restricted  and  local  in  range  and,  in 
general,  extended  to  just  such  parts  of  the  nation  as  were  pre- 
pared, for  their  own  advantage,  to  submit  to  it.  And  it  is  not 
improbable  that  at  first  it  was  temporary  in  duration,  and  was 
laid  down  when  the  emergency  which  demanded  it  was  brought 
to  an  end.  But  no  doubt  such  authority,  once  assumed,  was 
in  many  cases  retained,  and  the  Judges,  from  being  asserters  of 
their  country's  liberties,  came  to  occupy  a  position  more  ac- 
curately corresponding  to  their  title,  and  became  magistrates 
as  well  as  military  chiefs.  And  later,  there  seem  to  have  been 
Judges  who  owed  their  existence  from  the  first  to  the  popular 
need  of  some  central  authority  to  meet  other  requirements  than 
that  of  direction  in  war.  Of  five  of  those  named  in  the  book 
of  Judges  no  warlike  exploits  of  a  personal  character  are  re- 
corded, and  the  same  is  true  of  two  others  who  are  styled 
Judges,  but  whose  history  falls  outside  the  book,  namely  Eli  and 
Samuel  ;i  whilst  the  description  of  Deborah  (in  Jud.  iv.  5) 
implies  that  she  also  exercised  some  judicial  functions  prior 
to  the  warlike  movement  which  she  initiated  in  conjunction  with 
Barak.  Probably  Judges  of  both  types  acquired  their  influence 
and  authority  insensibly  by  the  spread  of  their  reputation  for  the 
qualities  most  in  requisition,  though  an  instance  is  not  lacking  of 
a  leader  demanding  and  receiving  a  formal  tender  of  obedience 
{Jud,  xi.  9  foil.)    They  were  in  no  sense  ordinary  elective  officers 

*  But  on  the  passages  relating  to  Samuel  see  pp.  216-7. 
O 


194  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

like  the  Carthaginian  Suffetes^  (to  whose  name  the  Hebrew 
Shophetim  (used  to  describe  them)  is  presumably  akin) ;  and  still 
less  was  their  office  hereditary,  though  doubtless  they  could 
transmit  much  of  their  actual  influence  to  their  children,  if  the 
latter  could  maintain  it  (cf.  Jud.  ix.  2,  x.  4). 

Most  of  the  external  troubles  which  gave  occasion  for  the 
activity  of  the  Judges,  though  represented  by  the  compiler  of 
the  book  oi  Judges  as  national  conflicts,  affected,  so  far  as  can 
be  gathered  from  the  details  given,  only  a  narrow  area,  and  the 
extent  of  the  region  exposed  to  them  determined,  for  the  most 
part,  the  Umit  of  the  Judge's  authority,  outside  of  which  he  often 
encountered  hostility  from  his  own  countrymen.  When  the 
Canaanites,  headed  by  Jabin  of  Hazor,  overran  the  territories 
of  Zebulun  and  Naphtah,  only  a  few  of  the  other  tribes  aided 
the  rising  under  Barak.  Gideon,  the  Manassite  leader  against 
the  Midianites,  though  assisted  (if  the  existing  account  be  correct)^ 
by  Ephraim  in  the  pursuit  of  them,  could  only  disarm  the  sub- 
sequent hostility  of  the  other  division  of  the  house  of  Joseph 
by  submissive  flattery.  Jephthah  the  Gileadite  who  defeated 
Ammon,  was  actually  attacked  by  the  Ephraimites,  who  were 
jealous  of  his  independent  action.  To  such  instances  of  callous 
indifference  and  envious  rivalry  must  be  added  others  of  actual 
betrayal  of  Israel's  cause  under  the  influence  of  selfish  fears. 
The  city  of  Meroz,  though  the  nature  of  its  offence  is  quite 
unknown,  must  have  been  sorely  lacking  in  patriotism  to  provoke 
the  bitter  curse  of  Deborah  (^Jud.  v.  23).  The  citizens  of 
Succoth  and  Penuel  refused  to  supply  the  wants  of  Gideon's 
army ;  and  the  tribe  of  Judah  delivered  the  Danite  Samson  into 
the  hands  of  the  PhiUstines.  Such  instances  make  it  clear  that, 
v/hilst  the  attacks  made  upon  Israel  at  this  period  were  desultory 
and  unsystematic,  the  resistance  offered  to  them  was  in  most 
cases  equally  lacking  in  coherence  and  combination.  There 
was  as  yet  absent  from  the  Israelite  tribes  an  adequate  sense 
of  the  unity  which  was  involved  in  their  common  kindred  and 
their  common  faith.      Almost   the  sole  example  of  patriotism 

^  See  Livy  xxx.  7,  Suffers,  quod  velut  consular e  impgrium  apud  cos  erat. 
The  title  also  occurs  in  an  inscription  (5th  or  4th  century  B.C.)  of  Carthage, 
now  preserved  at  Marseilles.  *  See  below,  p.  203. 


THE  JUDGES 


195 


breathing  the  spirit  of  a  larger  national  life  is  that  of  the 
prophetess  Deborah,  who,  though  dwelling  in  Ephraim,  was  the 
soul  of  the  resistance  made  against  the  northern  Canaanites, 
and  who,  in  her  Song,  upbraided  the  tribes  who  stood  aloof  from 
helping  their  kinsmen  in  their  need. 

The  chronology  of  the  book  of  Judges  is  difficult  to  harmonise  both 
with  other  statements  made  in  the  O.T.  and  with  the  probable  facts  of  the 
case.  The  duration  of  the  Oppressions  and  of  the  rule  of  the  Judges  is  as 
follows : — 


Uushan-rishathaim 
Othniel 

0 
40 

Eglon  of  Moab 

18 

Ehud 

80 

(Shamgar 

— ) 

The  Canaanites 

20 

Deborah 

40 

The  Midianites 

7 

Gideon 

40 

Abimelech 

3 

Tola  . 

23 

Jair    . 

22 

The  Ammonites 

18 

/ephthah 

6 

:  ;bzan                 . 

7 

Elon  . 

10 

Abdon 

8 

The  Philistines . 

40 

Samson 

20 

The  total  number  of  years  amounts  to  410,  which  agrees  approximately 
with  the  300  years  (strictly  319)  which  are  represented  as  having  elapsed  prior 
to  Jephthah  \jttd.  xi.  26),  if  the  time  occupied  by  the  Conquest  is  ignored. 
But  in  /  Kg,  vi.  i  the  period  between  the  Exodus  and  the  building  of  Solo- 
mon's Temple  is  stated  to  be  480  years,  whereas  if  to  the  figures  m  Judges 
there  are  added  the  forty  years  each  of  Moses,  Eli,  and  David,  and  the  four 
years  of  Solomon  previous  to  the  foundation  of  the  Temple,  the  total  amounts 
to  534,  without  any  account  being  taken  not  only  of  the  time  covered  by  the 
Conquest  but  of  that  embraced  by  the  predominance  of  Samuel  and  the  reign 
of  Saul.  In  reality,  however,  the  period  between  the  Exodus  and  the 
Temple  was  probably  less  than  300  years,  if  the  former  event  be  fixed 
approximately  for  1250-1200,  and  the  building  of  the  Temple  for  970-950; 
whilst  it  seems  likely  that  the  system  of  chronology  followed  by  the  writer  of 
I  Kg.  vi.  is  an  artificial  one.  Forty  years  conventionally  described  a  genera- 
tion ;^  and  the  number  480  probably  represents  twelve  generations,  agreeably 
with  the  fact  that  the  High  Priest  Azariah,  who  was  contemporary  with  the 
erection  of  the  Temple,  was  the  twelfth  from  Aaron  (/  Ch.  vi.  4-9).*    With 

*  See  especially  Num.  xiv.  33. 

^  The  parenthetical  remark  in  i  Ch.  vi.  10  refers  to  the  Azariah  of  ver.  9, 
not  to  that  of  ver.  10 ;  the  son  (Amariah)  of  the  latter  was  contemporary  with 
Jehoshaphat  {2  Ch.  xix.  11). 

In  Ruth  iv.  20  David  is  only  the  fifth  firom  Moses  with  whom  his  ancestoi 
Nahshon  was  contemporary,  but  the  genealogical  table  is  doubtless  defective. 


196  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

regard  to  the  time  included  within  the  book  o{  Judges^  if  the  figures  giving 
the  duration  of  the  Oppressions  and  the  rule  of  the  Judges  could  be  regarded 
as  trustworthy,  it  would  be  absolutely  necessary  to  assume  that  some  of  the 
events  recounted  were  contemporaneous,  in  order  to  bring  them  within  the 
250  years  which  is  the  most  that  can  be  allowed  for  them.  Even  apart  from 
this,  such  an  assumption  is  probable  in  itself  and  favoured  by  the  record  ;  for 
in  X.  7  the  Philistines  and  Ammonites  are  represented  as  oppressing  Israel 
together,  though  Jephthah  only  delivered  the  country  from  the  latter,  so  that 
the  Philistine  domination  of  xiii.  i  may  have  been  simultaneous  with  part  of 
that  of  the  Ammonites,  whilst  within  the  forty  years  of  the  PhiUstine  rule 
Samson's  judgeship  of  twenty  years  seems  to  be  comprised  (xv.  20).  In 
point  of  fact,  however,  the  figures  in  Judges  are  probably  to  a  large  extent 
conventional  numbers, /jr/y  occurring  four  times,  whilst  its  double  eighty  is 
found  once  and  its  half  twenty  twice,  and  accordingly  afibrd  no  basis  for 
exact  calculations. 

The  uncertainty  as  to  how  far  the  incidents  embraced  within 
the  book  oi  Judges  were  successive  detracts  from  the  value  of 
any  attempt  to  arrange  them  in  chronological  order.  It  will 
therefore  be  convenient  to  recount  them  separately  as  they  are 
related,  without  determining  their  actual  historical  sequence, 
though  it  is  probable  that  the  oppression  by  Moab  is  correctly 
placed  among  the  earliest,  as  that  of  the  Philistines  in  c.  xiii.  was 
certainly  the  latest,  of  the  events  covered  by  this  period. 

1.  Oppression  by  Syrians  of  Mesopotamia^  under  Cushan- 
rishathaim :  deliverance  effected  by  Othniel,  brother  of  Caleb, 
a  Kenizzite  {Jud.  iii.  7-1 1). 

A  raid  upon  Judah,  with  whom  the  Kenizzites  were  united,  by  a  body  of 
Syrians  marching  along  the  maritime  plain  in  the  direction  of  Philistia  and 
Eg>'pt,  is  not  impossible  in  view  of  what  took  place  in  the  time  of  Hazael 
{2  Kg.  xii.  17);  and  an  army  from  Mesopotamia  is  said  to  have  ccme  into 
conflict  with  the  Egyptians  in  the  reign  of  Rameses  III.-  But  the  chronology 
of  this  period  is  too  doubtful  for  any  very  plausible  conclusions  to  be  drawn 
respecting  the  connection  of  this  with  the  invasion  of  Cushan-rishathaim  ; 
and  an  isolated  attack  upon  the  most  southern  tribe  by  a  foe  coming  from  the 
north  is  rather  improbable.  Cushan  as  a  place-name  occurs  in  Hab.  iii.  7  in 
connection  with  Midian,  a  people  in  Mosaic  times  dwelling  in  the  Sinaitic 
desert,  a  more  likely  quarter  for  a  raid  upon  Judah,  and  Syria  (Heb.  Aram) 
may  have  arisen  by  corruption  from  Edom. 

2.  Oppression  by  Moab  tinder  Eglon :  deliverance  effected 

by  Ehud  (/ud.  iii.  12-30). 

The  Moabites,  who  must  have  recovered  from  the  losses 
inflicted    upon   them   (according   to  Jos/i.    xxiv.    9-10)   in   the 

*  Heb.  Aram  Naharaim^  the  district  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Habor 
(Chaboras).  *  Sayce,  Early  History  of  the  Hebrews,  pp.  285-6. 


THE  JUDGES  197 

time  of  Moses,  were  probably  desirous  of  following  in  the 
track  of  Israel  in  order  to  share  the  conquest  of  the  western 
side  of  the  Jordan.  They  crossed  the  river  in  combination  with 
a  body  of  Ammonites  and  Amalekites,  seized  Jericho,  "  the  city 
of  palm  trees"  {Deut,  xxxiv.  3),  and  imposed  tribute  upon  the 
surrounding  country  of  Benjamin.  Possibly  Gilgal  was  the 
seat  of  their  rule;  and  thither  Ehud,  a  Benjamite,  who  was 
left-handed,^  was  commissioned  to  convey  the  tribute  to  Eglon, 
the  Moabite  king.  After  presenting  it,  he  dismissed  his 
attendants,  and  then  returning  to  the  king,  he  obtained  a  private 
interview  by  claiming  to  be  the  bearer  of  an  oracle  meant  for 
the  king's  ear  alone.  His  left-handedness  enabled  him  to  carry 
a  weapon  with  him  without  being  suspected,  and  when  Eglon  rose 
from  his  seat  out  of  respect  for  the  pretended  message,  Ehud 
thrust  his  sword  through  the  king's  body.  The  assassin  effected 
his  escape,^  and  in  answer  to  his  summons,  the  Ephraimites 
seized  the  fords  of  the  Jordan,  where  the  Moabites,  dis- 
heartened by  the  death  of  their  sovereign,  were  attempting  to 
cross  the  river,  and  cut  them  to  pieces. 

3.   Oppression  by  the  Philistines :  deliverance  effected  by 
Shamgar  {/ud.  iii.  31). 

This  attack  by  the  Philistines  in  the  south  seems  to  have  been 
contemporaneous  with  that  by  the  Canaanites  in  the  north, 
described  below  (see  Jud.  v.  6).  The  Philistines,  after  repel- 
ling the  attack  upon  Gaza,  Ashkelon,  and  Ekron  which  had 
been  made  by  Judah  at  the  Conquest  (p.  175),  now  began 
to  retaliate.  Advancing  along  the  maritime  plain,  they  pene- 
trated into  the  hill  country  of  Judah  and  Ephraim  through  the 
valleys  of  Elah,  Sorek,  and  Aijalon;  and  wherever  they  estab- 
lished their  authority  they  seem  to  have  made  it  a  practice  to 
disarm  the  population  (cf.  i  Sam.  xiii.  19,  22).  But  even  under 
such   conditions  a  successful   rising  was  effected  by  Shamgar, 

*  Instances  of  men  who  were  left-handed  were  relatively  common  in 
Benjamin  ;  d.  Jud.  xx.  i6,  /  Ch.  xii.  2. 

^  The  final  words  oi  Jud.  iii.  22  are  very  obscure.  The  translation  of  the 
R  V.  text  involves  a  correction  of  the  Heb. ;  whilst  the  marginal  rendering 
comes  from  the  LXX.  (jk^rikQ^v  'Aw5  rT]v  irpoaTdda),  and  anticipates  what  is 
described  in  the  next  verse. 


198  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

though  the  only  weapons  possessed  by  him  and  his  supporters 
were  rustic  implements  {Jud.  iii.  31).^ 

4.    Oppression  by  the  Canaanites :  deliverance  effected  by 
Barak  {Jud.  iv.,  v.). 

The  outbreak  of  the  Canaanites  in  the  north  was  a  renewal  of 

the  earlier  struggle  against  Joshua  {Josh.  c.  xi.).  The  city  of 
Razor  had  recovered  from  its  ruin,  and  its  king  Jabin  was 
now  the  head  of  a  confederacy,  the  united  forces  of  which 
were  under  the  command  of  Sisera,  whose  home  was  at 
Harosheth,  at  the  foot  of  Carmel,  and  who  dominated  the 
plain  of  Esdraelon.  Possessing  a  powerful  body  of  chariots, 
the  number  of  which  is  placed  at  900,  and  finding  in  the  plain 
excellent  facilities  for  their  manoeuvres,  the  Canaanites  obtained 
the  upper  hand  over  the  northern  tribes ;  and  Naphtali,  Zebulun, 
and  Issachar  were  subjected  to  severe  treatment.  The  stimulus 
to  revolt,  however,  came  from  outside,  Deborah,  a  prophetess  of 
Ephraim,  instigating  Barak^  of  Naphtali  to  organise  resistance 
among  the  oppressed  tribes.  Sympathisers  joined  him  from 
some  of  the  other  tribes  such  as  Ephraim,  Manasseh  (Machir), 
and  Benjamin ;  but  the  tribes  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  held  aloof,  as 
did  also  Dan  and  Asher.  Of  the  latter  Dan  was  perhaps 
struggling  against  the  encroaching  Philistines,  whilst  Asher  was 
possibly  too  closely  surrounded  by  the  Canaanite  populations  to 
render  much  aid.  Encouraged  by  Deborah,  without  whom  he 
refused  to  move,  Barak  advanced  southward  from  Kedesh  in 
Naphtali  (near  Lake  Merom),  gathering  on  the  march  forces 
which  ultimately  reached  10,000  men;  and  took  up  a  position  on 
mount  Tabor,  at  the  N.E.  angle  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon.  As  the 
Canaanites,  approaching  from  Harosheth,  along  the  banks  of  the 
Kishon,  entered  the  plain,  Barak  charged  down  upon  them  from 
I  he  slopes  of  Tabor.  The  onset  of  the  Israelites  was  aided  by 
a   storm   ij'ud,  v.   20,  21),  which  dismayed   their  foes;  whilst 

^  Jud.  iii.  31  most  naturally  means  that  Shamgar  slew  600  with  his  own 
hand  (cf.  2  Sam.  xxiii.  8) ;  but  the  word  oxgoadm2iy  perhaps  be  used  collectively, 
and  imply  that  he  and  his  followers  were  armed  with  these  weapons,  which 
were  long  staves,  tipped  with  a  spike. 

^  Possibly  the  Bcdan  named  in  i  Ham.  xii.  1 1  is  an  error  for  Barak  which 
the  LXX.  reads. 


THE  JUDGES  199 

possibly  (as  has  been  suggested  by  some)  the  reinforcements 
from  the  southern  tribes  assailed  the  Canaanites  from  another 
quarter.  Broken  by  the  attack,  the  bulk  of  the  enemy  fled 
west  to  Harosheth,  pursued  by  Israel.  Others,  with  their  captain 
Sisera,  crossed  the  Kishon,  in  which  many  perished  as  the 
stream  was  swollen  by  the  storm.  Sisera  himself  escaped  and 
sought  refuge  with  a  body  of  Kenites,  who  were  encamped  near 
Kedesh  in  Issachar,^  and  were  on  terms  of  amity  with  Jabin. 
There  he  was  received  by  Jael,  the  wife  of  one  of  them  named 
Heber,  who  invited  him  into  her  tent  and  professed  her  willing- 
ness to  conceal  him  from  the  enemy;  but  whilst  he  slept,  she 
killed  him  by  hammering  a  tent-peg  through  his  temples  as  he  lay 
on  the  ground  asleep.  The  victory  was  celebrated  by  Deborah 
in  a  song  of  triumph  which  has  been  preserved.^  This  reverse 
finally  crushed  the  Canaanites,  though  isolated  places,  like  the 
citadel  of  Jerusalem,  still  maintained  their  independence;  and 
henceforward  the  enemies  of  Israel  were  foreign. 

It  has  been  held  that  serious  discrepancies  exist  between  the  prose  account 
{Jud.  iv.)  and  the  description  of  events  given  in  the  Song  of  Deborah 
{Jud.  v.).  In  the  first,  {a)  Sisera  is  merely  the  general  of  Jabin  king  of 
Hazor ;  [b)  Barak  comes  from  Naphtali ;  {c)  the  only  tribe,  besides  Naphtali, 
that  joins  him  is  Zebulun  ;  [d)  Sisera  is  slain,  when  asleep,  by  a  tent-peg 
driven  through  his  head.  In  the  second  it  is  alleged  that  (a)  Sisera  is  named 
to  the  exclusion  of  Jabin  ;  {b)  Barak  is  associated  with  the  tribe  of  Issachar  ; 
{c)  he  is  joined  by  Ephraim,  Benjamin,  and  Manasseh  (Machir)  as  well  as 
Zebulun  ;  {d)  Sisera  is  struck  down  by  Jael  with  a  hammer  (of  which  the  nail 
to  which  she  is  said  to  have  put  her  hand  (ver.  26)  is  taken  to  be  the  handle) 
as  he  stooped  to  drink  the  milk  proffered  him.  But  (a)  Sisera  may  have  been 
a  vassal  king  or  ally,  whom  the  prose  account  equally  with  the  song  recog- 
nises as  the  commander  of  the  Canaanite  forces ;  {b)  the  conclusion  that 
Barak  belonged  to  Issachar  is  not  really  involved  in  the  language  of  v.  15; 

*  See  I  Ch.  vi.  72.  It  was  on  the  left  of  the  Kishon,  between  Taanach 
and  Megiddo.  If  Kedesh  Naphtali  near  the  waters  of  Merom  be  meant, 
Sisera  must  have  fled  northwards  and  passed  Hazor  in  his  flight,  which  is  a 
little  unnatural.  There  was  also  a  Kedesh  at  the  S.W.  corner  of  Lake 
Chinnereth ;  and  if  this  be  intended,  Sisera  must  have  turned  in  a  N.E. 
direction,  his  army  perhaps  being  cut  in  two  by  Barak's  charge.  This  Kedesh, 
like  the  preceding,  was  in  Naphtali,  and  may  have  been  the  home  of  Barak, 
a  view  more  consistent  with  the  negotiations  with  Deborah  (see  iv.  6),  for 
between  the  Kedesh  N.  of  Hazor  and  Deborah's  home  in  Ephraim,  the 
Canaanites'  dominion  intervened. 

^  It  is  not  quite  certain  that  the  song  is  by  Del^orah  herself.  Her  author- 
ship, indeed,  seems  implied  in  ver.  7  ;  but  the  LXX.  reads  ?a>s  ov  dy^a-Trj 
A^/S/Swpa,  and  the  Hebrew  admits  of  being  rendered  un^i/  thoiiy  Deborah, 
didst  arise  (Deborah  being  addressed  as  in  ver.  12). 


200  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

(c)  the  allusion  to  the  support  given  by  the  various  tribes  named  in  v.  14  does 
not  necessarily  imply  large  reinforcements,  and  c.  iv.,  which  asserts  Deborah's 
connection  with  Ephraim,  thereby  suggests  that  help  was  furnished  by  that 
tribe  at  least ;  {d)  the  description  of  Sisera's  death  in  v.  27  can  scarcely,  in 
poetry,  be  regarded  as  flatly  contradicting  that  contained  in  iv.  21,  whilst 
the  word  rendered  nat'/  or  tent-peg  seems  always  to  have  that  meaning  except 
in  Deut.  xxiii.  13  (where  it  signifies  a  "pick"  or  "spade"). 

5.  Oppression  by  Midian  and  other  Eastern  tribes :  deliver- 
ance effected  by  Gideon  {Jud.  vi.-viii.). 

The  Midianites  (called  Ishmadites  in  Jud.  viii.  24,  cf.  Gen. 
XXX vii.  25-28),  who  at  the  time  of  the  Exodus  occupied  part 
of  the  Sinaitic  peninsula,  are  mentioned  by  one  of  the  Penta- 
teuchal  sources  in  connection  with  Moab  on  the  E.  of  Jordan ; 
and  it  was  from  this  direction  that  they  now  made  an  attack  upon 
Israel.  A  body  of  them,  accompanied  by  Amalekites  and  other 
Bedouin  tribes  of  the  desert,  crossed  the  Jordan  (perhaps  at  Beth- 
barah),  and  spread  themselves  in  Esdraelon,  penetrating  (if  the 
statement  in  vi.  4  can  be  trusted)  along  the  maritime  plain  as  far 
as  Gaza.  The  distress  they  caused  was  most  severe,  the  Israelite 
husbandmen  having  all  the  fruits  of  their  labour  snatched  from 
them  by  the  marauders  (cf.  vi.  3,  11).  An  attempt  at  resistance 
at  length  came  from  Gideon  or  Jerubbaal,  a  Manassite  of  Ophrah.^ 
He  was  incited  to  action  both  by  the  desire  to  avenge  his  brothers, 
who  had  been  slain  by  the  Midianites  (viii.  18),  and  by  the  belief 
that  he  was  divinely  commissioned  to  deliver  his  countrymen 
from  the  hand  of  their  enemies.  It  is  related  that  the  angel  of 
Jehovah  appeared  to  him  and  declared  that  Jehovah  was  with 
him ;  and  on  his  asking  how  that  could  be  when  such  evil  had 
befallen  the  people,  he  was  bidden  to  go  at  the  Divine  command 
and  save  Israel.  When  he  proceeded  to  plead  the  insignificance 
of  his  family  and  himself  for  so  great  an  undertaking,  he  was 
reassured ;  and  an  offering  which  he  presented  being  consumed 
by  fire  from  the  rock  on  which  it  was  placed,  he  accepted  the  sign 
and  built  an  altar  there  to  Jehovah,  which  he  called  Jehovah 
Shalom  (vi.  1 1-24).  He  accordingly  organised  a  revolt  amongst 
his  own  clansmen  of  Abiezer,  and  took  up  his  position  near  the 

*  Its  precise  situation  is  unknown,  but  it  is  generally  identified  with  a 
locality  near  Shechem. 


THE  JUDGES  201 

spring  of  Harod  at  the  foot  of  mount  Gilboa,^  the  Midianite 
host  lying  in  the  valley  around  the  base  of  an  opposite  eminence 
called  the  hill  of  Moreh.  But  his  force  only  amounted  to  300 
men,  and  with  these  he  saw  that  his  best  hope  of  victory  lay  in  a 
surprise.  To  discover  the  chances  of  a  successful  night  attack, 
Gideon,  with  an  attendant,  entered  the  Midianite  camp,  and  over- 
heard one  man  tell  another  a  dream,  in  which  a  cake  of  barley 
bread  tumbled  into  the  camp  and  struck  and  overthrew  a  tent  ;2 
and  this  the  Israelite  chief  took  as  a  favourable  omen.  Return- 
ing to  his  own  forces,  he  divided  his  small  body  of  300  men  into 
three  bands,  and  provided  every  man  with  a  trumpet,  and  a 
pitcher  concealing  a  torch  within  it,  with  directions  to  blow  the 
trumpet  and  break  the  pitcher  on  drawing  near  the  enemy.  The 
noise  and  flashing  lights  suggested  to  the  Midianites  the  approach 
of  a  large  hostile  army,  and  they  fled  in  confusion.  The  success 
of  Gideon's  blow  rallied  to  him  the  tribes  of  Manasseh,  Naphtali, 
and  Asher ;  and  the  enemy  retiring  in  the  direction  of  the  Jordan 
were  vigorously  pursued.  Nevertheless  they  effected  their  escape 
across  the  Jordan ;  and  only  Gideon  with  his  300  continued  the 
chase  on  the  farther  side.  In  the  course  of  it,  he  was  refused 
provisions  by  the  citizens  of  Succoth  and  Penuel,  who,  owing  to 
their  position,  were  perhaps  afraid  of  the  Midianite  power  ;^  but 
in  spite  of  the  distress  which  such  refusal  entailed  upon  his  fol- 
lowers, he  succeeded  in  overtaking  the  fugitives,  whom  he  sur- 
prised at  Karkor^  and  defeated  with  loss,^  capturing  their  two 
leaders,  named  Zebah  and  Zalmunna.  On  his  return  he  took 
vengeance^  on  the  leading  men  of  Succoth  (numbering  seventy- 
seven  persons) ;  and  proceeding  next  to  Penuel,  pulled  down  its 

^  In/ud.  vii.  3  Gilboa  should  be  read  for  Gilead. 

^  ^  The  barley  loaf,  falling  on  the  tent  from  above,  may  be  taken  to  represent 
Gideon's  peasant  army,  posted  on  the  hill  sides. 

^  Possibly  at  this  time  the  Jordan  was  a  serious  barrier  to  the  mutual 
sympathy  of  the  eastern  and  western  tribes :  compare  the  dissensions  between 
Jephthah  and  the  Ephraimites. 

■*  Its  position  is  unknown.  Jogbehah,  on  the  road  to  it,  was  S.  of  the 
Jabbok,  so  that  the  pursuit  passed  towards  the  S.E. 

^  The  number  of  Midianites  represented  as  slain  at  Karkor  is  120,000, 
which  must  be  an  enormously  exaggerated  figure. 

^  For  the  mode  of  torture  implied  \njud.  viii.  7  cf.  Hdt.  i.  92,  tov  dpdpojirov 
rbp  dyTtirpri<7aoi>Ta  M  Kydtpov  ^Xkuv  5U(pdei.p€. 


202  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

tower  and  killed  its  citizens.  He  then  ordered  his  son  to  execute 
the  two  Midianite  chiefs,  but  as  the  young  man  shrank  from  the 
task,  he  slew  them  with  his  own  hand. 

The  successful  conclusion  to  which  Gideon  brought  the  cam- 
paign led  to  its  being  proposed  to  create  him  king;  but  the 
oflfer  of  kingly  authority  was  refused  by  him.  He  seems,  however, 
to  have  assumed  considerable  state ;  for  his  wives  were  numerous 
enough  to  make  him  the  father  of  seventy  sons.  He  begged, 
moreover,  for  part  of  the  booty  procured  from  Midian ;  and  with 
the  gold  and  purple  thus  obtained  he  made  an  ephod,  which  he 
placed  in  Ophrah,  his  native  city.  The  amount  of  gold  used  in 
connection  with  the  ephod  (1,700  shekels)  suggests  that,  if  the 
ephod  was  not  an  image,^  but  the  priestly  garment  usually 
denoted  by  the  word,  there  must  have  been  attached  to  it  some 
golden  ornaments  (answering  to  the  "breast-plate  of  judgment" 
described  in  Ex.  xxviii.  15  foil.).  In  any  case,  Gideon's  object 
seems  to  have  been  to  establish  a  substitute  for  the  oracle 
at  Shiloh.  The  possession  of  the  oracle  at  Shiloh  may  have 
helped  to  give  to  Ephraim  the  prestige  which  at  this  time  it 
appears  to  have  enjoyed  {zi.  Jud.  viii.  i,  xii.  i);  and  the  ephod 
at  Ophrah  was  doubtless  intended  as  a  counterpoise. 

The  narrative  of  Gideon  is  in  many  respects  exceedingly  obscure,  and  appears 
to  be  derived  from  conflicting  sources.  In  particular,  there  seem  to  be 
discrepant  accounts  of  (a)  Gideon's  call  to  arms,  {b)  the  mustering  of  his  army, 
if)  the  names  and  end  of  the  Midianite  leaders. 

(a)  In  the  section  vL  11-24  (followed  in  the  text)  Gideon  shows  no 
consciousness  of  national  guilt  on  the  part  of  Israel,  and  spontaneously  builds 
an  altar  to  Jehovah ;  whereas  in  ver.  7-10  the  calamities  of  the  people  are 
ascribed  to  their  apostasy,  and  in  ver.  25-32  Gideon  is  accordingly  directed 
to  throw  down  the  altar  of  Baal,  and  build  one  unto  Jehovah  instead,  which 
he  only  dared  to  do  by  night.  When  his  fellow-citizens  in  consequence  sought 
to  kill  him,  he  was  only  saved  by  his  father's  intervention,  who  asked  his 
adversaries  why  they  should  plead  for  Baal  who,  if  a  god,  could  plead  for 
himself;  and  hence  Gideon  obtained  the  name  oijerubbaal.^ 

1  See  p.  282. 

^  The  nzxsx^  Jerubbaalvi  explained  to  mean  "Let  Baal  plead  against  him." 
But  it  is  possible  that  at  this  time  Baal  was  a  title  applied  to  Jehovah  as  well 
as  to  the  various  Canaanite  deities  (see  p.  279),  in  which  case  the  name  must 
really  mean  "Baal  {i.e.  Jehovah)  contends"  (alluding  to  Jehovah's  fighting 
for  His  people) ;  cf.  Jehoiarib  (/  Ch.  ix.  lo).  Some  authorities,  however, 
connect  the  former  part  of  the  word  with  a  verb  meaning  "to  found,"  and 
compare  the  xi^sat  Jcrtul  {2  Ch.  xx.  16).  From  the  same  motive  which  led 
to  the  substitution  of  Ishbosheth  and  Mephibosheth  for  Eshbaal  and  Mcribbaal^ 
the  name  appears  zs  Jerubbtsheih  in  2  Szm.  xi.  21. 


THE  JUDGES  203 

(3)  In  vii.  23  the  tribes  of  Naphtali,  Asher,  and  Manasseh  join  Gideon 
only  in  the  pursuit  of  the  Midianites ;  but  in  vi.  35  the  same  tribes,  with  the 
addition  of  Zebulun,  join  him  before  the  battle,  to  the  number  of  32,000 
(vii.  3).  But  this  being  too  large  a  host  for  Jehovah  to  deliver  Midian  into 
its  hands,  lest  Israel  should  vaunt  itself,  Gideon  is  directed  to  reduce  his  army 
to  smaller  proportions  by  (i)  dismissing  the  timorous,  (2)  rejecting  all  who 
drank  of  the  water  of  the  spring  Harod  in  a  particular  fashion.^ 

(<r)  In  viii.  4-21  the  Midian  chiefs  (described  as  kings)  are  named  Zebah 
and  ZahnunnUf  and  are  captured  on  the  E.  of  Jordan  by  Gideon ;  whereas 
in  the  section  vii.  24-viii.  3  (where  they  are  called  princes),  they  are  named 
Oreb  and  Zeeb,  and  are  taken  at  the  fords  of  Jordan  by  the  Ephraimites, 
whom  Gideon  had  urged  to  cut  off  their  retreat.  After  the  termination 
of  the  war,  the  Ephraimites  are  represented  as  being  inclined  to  pick  a 
quarrel  with  Gideon  for  not  having  summoned  them  to  share  the  battle  as 
well  as  the  pursuit ;  but  are  pacified  by  Gideon  depreciating  his  own  exploit 
in  comparison  with  their  destruction  of  the  enemy's  leaders. 

If  the  view  that  the  narrative  has  been  compiled  from  two  variant  versions 
be  correct,  the  fusion  is  too  complete  to  allow  of  their  being  distinguished 
with  any  great  confidence ;  and  the  discrepancy  noted  under  (r)  admits  of 
being  reconciled  by  the  supposition  that  Ephraim  destroyed  one  section  of 
the  Midianites,  with  its  two  leaders,  and  Gideon  another. 

6.  Usurpation  of  Abimelech  (Jud.  ix.). 

The  sovereignty  which  Gideon  dechned  was  seized  by  one  of 
his  sons,  Abimelech  by  name.  This  man  was  borne  to  Gideon 
by  a  Canaanite  woman  of  Shechem,  and  by  working  upon  the 
feehngs  of  kinship  which  united  him  to  the  Shechemites,  he 
induced  the  latter  to  support  him.  By  means  of  a  sum  of 
money  taken  from  the  temple  of  Baal-berith  and  placed  at  his 
disposal  he  hired  a  band  of  rufhans ;  and  by  their  aid  he  slew 
his  seventy  brethren  (one,  named  Jotham,  alone  excepted)  at 
Ophrah.  The  inhabitants  of  Shechem  and  Beth-millo  (the 
latter  probably  a  neighbouring  fortress)  then  made  Abimelech 
king.  Jotham,  who  had  escaped  the  slaughter  of  his  brothers, 
on  hearing  of  this,  took  his  stand  on  Mount  Gerizim,  and  from 
thence  reproached  the  Shechemites  for  their  ingratitude  in  an 
apologue; 2    and    afterwards    took    to    flight.      The    blood    of 

*  The  nature  of  the  test  in  Jud,  vii.  5-6  is  obscure.  From  ver.  6  it  seems 
that  those  were  selected  who,  stooping,  just  dipped  their  hand  in  the  water 
and  put  it  to  their  mouth,  thereby  showing  their  wariness  in  the  presence  of 
the  enemy  (though  Josephus,  Ant,  v.  6,  3,  heightens  the  wonder  of  the 
subsequent  victory  by  explaining  that  these  were  actuated  by  fear) ;  whilst 
those  were  rejected  who  carelessly  knelt  down  to  drink.  Ver.  5,  describing 
beforehand  those  to  be  rejected,  also  adds  the  still  more  reckless  men  who 
threw  themselves  upon  their  faces  and  drank  like  dogs. 

"^  The  application  of  Jotham's  apologue  {.Jiui,  ix.  7-20)  to  the  circumstances 


204  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Gideon's  family  was  not  long  left  unavenged.  A  breach  ensued 
between  the  native  Shechemites  and  Abimelech;  and  a  revolt 
against  the  latter,  who  had  retired  to  the  neighbouring  town  of 
Arumah,  was  incited  by  an  immigrant  named  Gaal,  the  son  of 
Ebed,^  who  at  a  vintage  festival  urged  the  native  Shechemites 
to  rebel  against  the  half-breed  Abimelech.  The  governor  whom 
the  latter  had  appointed  over  the  city,  one  Zebul,  was  unable 
himself  to  quell  the  mutiny,  but  informed  Abimelech,  who 
approached  the  place  with  an  armed  force;  and  Gaal,  being 
induced  by  Zebul's  taunts  to  meet  him,  was  defeated  with  loss. 
A  number  of  his  supporters  were  slain,  and  he  himself  with  his 
brethren  was  shut  out  of  the  city  by  Zebul,  nothing  being 
related  about  his  ultimate  fate  (ix.  26-41).  The  Shechemites, 
who  had  taken  to  brigandage  (ver.  25)  and  robbed  all  who  passed 
along  the  high  road  which  ran  between  Ebal  and  Gerizim,  were 
waylaid  in  turn  by  Abimelech  who  had  been  made  acquainted 
with  their  proceedings.  ^  The  city  was  then  attacked  and  taken, 
its  inhabitants  slaughtered,  its  walls  razed,  and  its  site  sown  with 
salt,  though  it  seems  to  have  been  afterwards  rebuilt  (see  i  Kg. 
xii.  i).  The  garrison  of  the  tower  of  Shechem  (possibly  a  fort 
outside  the  city)  took  refuge  in  the  temple  of  El-berith  (or 
Baal-berith),  which  was  burnt  over  their  heads,  1,000  persons, 
it  is  said,  perishing  in  the  flames  (ver.  42-49).  Subsequently 
Abimelech  attacked  a  place  called  Thebez  which  he  took,  but 
in  an  assault  upon  a  stronghold  within  the  city,  he  was  injured 

is  not  very  close.  The  thistle  (representing  the  worthless  Abimelech),  after 
accepting  the  sovereignty  of  the  trees,  which  the  nobler  oUve  and  vine  had 
refused,  debates  the  sincerity  of  the  trees  (which  represent  the  Shechemites) 
in  choosing  it  to  rule  over  them  (ver.  15) ;  but  it  was  not  the  Shechemites' 
sincerity  towards  Abimelech  which  was  in  question,  but  their  gratitude  towards 
Gideon  (Jerubbaal)  whose  family  they  had  sufiered  Abimelech  to  slay  (18-19). 

^  The  LXX.  B  has  Ioj/StjX,  which,  if  the  true  reading,  points  to  Gaal  l:>eiiig 
an  IsraeUte,  not  a  Shechemite. 

2  In  Jud.  ix.  the  narrative  relating  to  Gaal  and  the  destruction  of  the 
Shechemites  seems  to  be  in  some  disorder,  ver.  42  being  connected  with 
ver.  25.  Though  a  fairly  consistent  account  may  be  constructed  from  the 
narrative  as  it  stands,  it  is  not  improbable  that  the  section  ver.  26-41  is  an 
alternative  version  of  ver.  22-25,  42-49.  According  to  the  former,  the 
punishment  that  befell  the  ungrateful  Shechemites  (see  ver.  57)  was  limited  to 
the  slaughter  before  the  gates  (ver.  40),  according  to  the  latter,  it  involved  the 
total  destruction  both  of  the  city  and  its  population. 


THE   JUDGES  205 

by  a  woman  who  broke  his  skull  with  a  millstone  cast  from  the 
wall :  and  to  avoid  the  humiliation  of  having  it  said  that  he 
perished  by  a  woman's  hand,  ^  he  bade  his  armour-bearer  thrust 
him  through. 

7.  Two  Minor  Judges,  Tola  and  Jair  {Jud.  x.  1-5). 

Tola,  the  son  of  Puah,^  was  a  native  of  Issachar,  but  dwelt  at 
Shamir,  in  mount  Ephraim,  a  fact  that  seems  to  indicate  that  his 
authority  extended  beyond  the  limits  of  his  native  tribe. 

Jair  is  described  as  a  Gileadite.  His  name  is  associated  with 
certain  cities  (called  Havvoth  Jair)  on  the  E.  of  Jordan,  which 
were  in  the  possession  of  his  sons.  These  were  perhaps  the 
settlements  made  by  immigrants  from  Manasseh  already  referred 
to  (see  Num.  xxxii.  39-41,  and  cf.  p.  127),  their  number  and  situa- 
tion being  variously  stated. 

In  Jtid.  X.  4  the  number  of  these  cities  is  given  as  30  (LXX.  32),  but  in 
/  Ch.  ii.  22,  as  23,  both  authorities  locating  them  in  Gilecui.  Injosh.  xiii.  30, 
Deut.  iii.  14,  and  i  Ch.  ii.  23,'  they  are  confused  with  a  group  of  60  cities  in 
Jiashan  (see  /  Kg.  iv.  13).  The  region  in  Bashan  peculiarly  associated  with 
them,  named  Argob,  has  been  by  some  identified  with  a  district  of  curious 
volcanic  formation,  now  called  the  Leja,  which  lies  south  of  Damascus. 
Others  place  it  further  west,  on  the  borders  of  Maacah  (in  the  neighbourhood 
of  the  Sea  of  Chinnereth). 

8.  Oppression  by  the  Ammonites ;  deliverance  effected  by 
Jepbthah  {/ud.  x.  6-xii.  7). 

The  locality  which  suffered  from  the  attacks  of  the  Ammonites 
was  Gilead,  E.  of  the  Jordan.  The  inhabitants  in  their  distress 
had  recourse  to  Jephthah  (whose  name  is  probably  shortened 
from  Jephthah-el),  an  outlaw,  who,  as  the  son  of  a  harlot  (pro- 
bably a  woman  of  non-Israehte  extraction),  had  been  driven  from 
his  country,  and  had  taken  refuge  in  the  land  of  Tob,  a  district 
bordering  on  Maacah  and  Syria,  where  he  became  the  leader  of 
a  band  of  freebooters.  On  condition  of  having  the  rule  over 
Gilead  solemnly  assured  to   him  at  the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah 

^  His  fear  was  justified;  see  2  Sam.  xi.  21. 

^  The  LXX.  makes  Puah  the  uncle  {irarpcideXcpos)  of  Abimelech,  and  con- 
sequently brother  of  Gideon;  but  the  latter  belonged  to  Manasseh,  not  to 
Issachar. 

2  According  to  /  Ck.  ii.  23  the  towns  of  Jair,  with  Kenath,  were  taken 
from  Israel  by  the  Geshurites  and  Syrians,  probably  in  the  wars  waged  with 
the  Syrian  kings  Benhadad  and  Hazael  (see  pp.  343,  348). 


2o6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

(probably  at  Mizpah,  in  Gilead),  in  the  event  of  a  successful 
issue,  he  responded  to  the  appeal  of  his  fellow-countrymen.  He 
first  applied  for  help  to  the  Ephraimites  on  the  W.  of  Jordan 
(xii.  2) ;  but  as  they  turned  a  deaf  ear,  he  determined  to  assail 
the  Ammonites  with  such  resources  as  he  could  command  from 
his  own  tribesmen.  After  sending  a  remonstrance  to  the  Am- 
monite king  for  his  wanton  invasion  of  a  country  taken  by  Israel 
not  from  them  or  from  Moab  but  from  the  Amorites,  Jephthah 
assumed  the  offensive,  and  defeated  and  pursued  the  enemy 
from  Aroer,  on  the  east  of  Rabbah  {Josh.  xiii.  25),  to  Minnith 
and  Abel-cheramim  (unknown  localities  in  Ammonite  territory). 
Having,  before  setting  out,  vowed  to  sacrifice  to  Jehovah  that 
which  first  came  forth  from  the  doors  of  his  house  ^  to  meet  him 
on  his  return,  he  found  his  triumph  marred  by  his  daughter  being 
the  one  to  do  so.  The  maiden  heroically  submitted  to  the  fate 
which  her  father's  rash  utterance  entailed  upon  her;  and  after 
allowing  her  two  months'  respite  to  bewail  her  untimely  death, 
he  did  to  her  according  to  his  vow.  2  It  afterwards  became  a 
custom  in  Israel  to  lament  the  daughter  of  Jephthah  four  times 
a  year.^ 

As  has  been  seen,  there  is  reason  to  think  that  by  this  time 
part  of  the  region  E.  of  the  Jordan  had  been  occupied  by  detach- 
ments from  the  tribes  of  Joseph  who  were  settled  on  the  other 
side  of  the  river ;  and  the  western  Ephraimites  were  now  indignant 
that  they  had  had  no  share  in  the  overthrow  inflicted  on  Ammon 
by  Jephthah  and  his  Gileadites,  whom  they  arrogantly  termed  run- 
aways *  from  Ephraim  and  Manasseh.    They  accordingly  crossed 

^  These  words  certainly  suggest  that  Jephthah  contemplated  a  human 
sacrifice  when  he  made  his  vow.     The  LXX.  has  6  iKiropevofievos,  k.t.X. 

2  The  Heb.  text  of  /tt^.  xi.  39  gives  no  countenance  to  the  view  that  the 
execution  of  Jephthah's  vow  consisted  in  consigning  his  daughter  to  perpetual 
virginity.  He  doubtless  actually  did  what  Saul  subsequently  was  fully  pre- 
pared to  do  (7  Sam.  xiv.  44). 

^  A  story  similar  to  that  of  Jephthah  is  related  by  Servius  (quoted  by 
Conington  on  Verg.  A.  iii.  122)  of  the  Greek  Idomeneus.  Being  caught  in 
a  storm,  he  vowed  to  the  gods  of  the  sea  that  if  preserved  he  would  sacrifice 
to  them  the  first  creature  that  met  him  on  landing,  which  proved  to  be  his 
son.  He  duly  performed  his  vow;  but  a  plague  visiting  Crete  in  consequence, 
he  was  expelled  by  the  inhabitants,  and  had  to  seek  a  new  home. 

*  This  rendering,  however,  is  contrary  to  the  usual  sense  of  the  word, 
which  generally  means  survivors,  and  is  so  employed  in  xii.  5. 


THE   JUDGES  207 

the  Jordan  to  Zaphon  (xii.  i  marg.),  a  town  of  Gad  in  the  Jordan 
valley  {Josh.  xiii.  27),  and  took  Jephthah  to  task  for  his  inde- 
pendent action  just  as  (according  to  one  account,  see  p.  203)  they 
had  previously  done  with  the  Manassite  Gideon  ;  and  as  Jephthah 
and  his  countrymen  replied  in  the  same  spirit,  a  conflict  followed 
in  which  Ephraim  was  worsted.  After  the  engagement  the 
Gileadites  seized  the  fords  of  Jordan  to  intercept  the  fugitives  as 
they  returned  across  the  river;  and  detecting  them  by  a  pecu- 
liarity of  speech  (the  word  Shibboleth^  "  stream,"  being  pronounced 
Sibbolethy  they  put  numbers  of  them  to  the  sword. 

Vajud.  X.  9  the  assertion  is  made  that  the  Ammonites  crossed  the  Jordan 
and  invaded  Judah,  Benjamin,  and  Ephraim  ;  but  the  statement,  in  view  of 
the  situation  of  Judah  and  the  subsequent  conduct  of  Ephraim,  is  highly 
improbable.  The  section  x.  6-i6  belongs  in  the  main  to  the  "framework" 
of  the  book  (see  Introd.  p.  9). 

In  xi.  2-3  Jephthah  is  represented  as  a  bastard  expelled  from  his  home  by 
the  legitimate  children  of  his  father  Gilead.  But  Gilead  is  obviously  a  local, 
not  a  personal,  name  ;  and  ver.  9  implies  that  Jephthah's  banishment  was  the 
work  of  the  "elders"  of  Gilead. 

The  narrative  of  xi.  12-28  is  not  free  from  difficulties,  for  in  it  Jephthah, 
whilst  addressing  the  king  of  the  Ammonites,  refers  to  the  conquest  of  Moab 
from  the  Amorites  as  related  in  Nuvi.  xxi.  Moreover,  it  is  of  Moab  that 
Chemosh  is  elsewhere  described  as  the  god  {Num.  xxi.  29,y<fr.  xlviii.  46),  the 
Ammonite  deity  being  Molech  or  Milcom  (7  Kg.  xi.  5,  2  Kg.  xxiii.  13).  But 
the  two  nations  were  closely  allied,  and  Chemosh  may  have  been  worshippeil 
by  both,  Milcom  being  possibly,  and  Molech  being  certainly,  a  title,  and  not 
a  personal  appellation. 

9.   Three  Minor  Judges,  Ibzan,  Elon,  and  Ahdon 
{Jud.  xii.  8- 1 5). 

Ibzan,  probably  of  Bethlehem  in  Zebulun^  {Josh.  xix.  15),  is 
said  to  have  had  thirty  sons  and  thirty  daughters.  At  his  death, 
he  was  buried  in  his  own  city. 

Elon  was  a  native  of  Zebulun,  of  whom  nothing  is  recorded 
except  the  name  of  his  burial  place,  Aijalon  in  Zebulun. 

Abdon,  the  son  of  Hillel  of  Pirathon  in  Ephraim,  is  related 
to  have  had  forty  sons  and  thirty  grandsons,  his  importance 
and  dignity  being  further  indicated  by  the  statement  that  his 

^  A  parallel  incident  has  been  adduced  (see  Moore  ad  loc. )  from  mediaeval 
history.  In  1282  at  Palermo  a  massacre  of  all  the  French  in  the  city  took 
place  in  consequence  of  an  outrage  upon  one  of  the  inhabitants  ;  and  the 
nationality  of  many  was  discovered  by  their  pronunciation  of  the  words  ceci  e 
ciceri. 

^  Josephus  {Ant,  v.  7,  13)  makes  Ibzan  a  native  of  Bethlehem  in  Judah. 


2o8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

numerous  offspring  rode  on  seventy  ass  colts  (since  the  ass 
at  this  time  was  the  animal  usually  ridden  by  persons  of  rank 
and  opulence ;  see  v.  lo,  x.  4). 

10.  Oppression  by  the  Philistines:  Samson  and  Eli 
i^Jud.  X.  7,  xiil-xvi.,  i  Sam.  i.-vii.  i). 

The  attacks  of  Moab,  Midian  and  Ammon  had  not  been 
of  much  more  than  local  importance;  but  those  now  initiated 
by  the  PhiHstines  really  threatened  the  subjugation  of  the  country 
at  large.  The  power  of  this  people  seems  to  have  increased 
more  rapidly  than  that  of  their  neighbours,  perhaps  in  conse- 
quence of  better  organisation,  their  five  leading  cities  being 
united  in  a  confederation.  The  extension  of  their  authority  had 
almost  extinguished  Simeon  as  a  tribe  and  even  overawed  Judah 
{/ud.  XV.  9-13).  The  latter  tribe  had  long  been  sundered  from 
the  main  body  of  Israel,  and  in  it  patriotic  spirit  seems  to  have 
sunk  to  an  exceedingly  low  ebb;  so  that  httle  opposition  was 
offered  to  the  PhiHstine  aggressions.  The  only  efforts  at  resist- 
ance during  the  early  stages  of  their  advance  were  made  by 
a  hero  of  the  tribe  of  Dan,  named  Samson,  a  native  of  Zorah. 
Of  his  wonderful  strength  and  caustic  humour  numerous  stories 
are  told;  but  the  character  of  many  of  them  makes  it  difficult 
to  place  implicit  confidence  in  the  record  as  a  whole,  though 
it  can  scarcely  be  questioned  that  it  has  an  historic  basis.  In 
the  account  as  it  stands,  Samson's  right  to  the  title  of  Judge 
rests  upon  nothing  but  his  slaughter  of  a  number  of  his  country's 
enemies  to  avenge  his  private  wrongs. 

According  to  the  narrative  Samson  was  the  son  of  a  man  named  Manoah, 
whose  wife  had  been  long  barren.  To  her  the  angel  of  Jehovah  appeared 
and  foretold  that  she  should  bear  a  son,  at  the  same  time  directing  her  to 
refrain,  before  the  child's  birth,  from  strong  drink  and  everything  unclean, 
and  declaring  that  the  child  should  be  a  Nazirite  (on  whose  head  no  razor 
might  come),  and  should  save  Israel  from  the  Philistines.  On  a  second  visit, 
at  which  Manoah,  who  was  present,  offered  a  burnt-offering  and  a  meal- 
offering,  the  angel  ascended  in  the  flame  that  consumed  the  sacrifice.  The 
woman  subsequently  bore  a  child,  who  was  called  Samson. 

When  Samson  grew  to  manhood,  he  sought  in  marriage  a  Philistine  woman, 
despite  the  protests  of  his  father  and  mother.     On  the  way  to  Timnah,^  where 

^  In  Jtid.  xiv.  5  foil,  there  are  some  slight  inconsistencies ;  for  whereas 
ver.  5  represents  Samson's  parents  as  accompanying  him  to  Timnah,  ver.  6 
implies  that  he  was  alone  when  he  killed  the  lion. 


THE   JUDGES  209 

the  woman  lived,  he  killed  a  young  lion,  in  whose  carcase  bees  afterwards 
swarmed,^  and  the  incident  suggested  to  him  a  riddle  which  he  propounded  to 
the  thirty  Philistines  appointed  to  be  his  companions  at  the  marriage  feast, 
staking  a  wager  that  they  would  not  solve  it  within  the  seven  days  that  the 
feast  lasted.  Failing  to  discover  the  answer  by  the  fourth  day  (so  LXX.  in 
xiv.  15),  they  induced  his  bride,  by  means  of  threats,  to  extract  it  from  him  ; 
and  Samson,  to  pay  the  wager  which  he  thus  lost,  smote  thirty  men  of 
Ashkelon  and  took  their  spoil.  He  then  left  the  Philistines  in  anger  ;  and 
when  he  subsequently  returned  to  claim  his  wife,  he  found  that  she  had  been 
given  to  another  man.  In  reven^re,  he  caught  300  foxes  and  tying  them 
in  pairs  by  the  tails,  with  lighted  fire-brands  between  them,  he  turned 
them  loose  among  the  standing  corn.  The  Philistines  retaliated  by  burning 
his  wife  and  her  father,  whom  Samson  avenged  with  a  great  slaughter  ;  after 
which  he  retired  to  the  rock  of  Etam  (in  Judah).  There  he  allowed  himself 
to  be  bound  by  the  men  of  Judah  in  order  to  be  delivered  to  the  Philistines  ; 
but  when  he  met  the  latter  at  a  place  called  Lehi,  he  burst  his  bonds,  and 
seizing  the  jaw-bone  of  an  ass,  he  smote  a  thousand  men.  After  casting  away 
the  jaw-bone  (the  place  receiving  in  consequence  the  name  of  Ramath  Lehi)^ 
he  was  athirst,  and  in  answer  to  his  cry  God  clave  the  hollow  place  in  Lehi, 
whence  there  came  forth  water  to  revive  him.  The  spring  thus  opened  was 
accordingly  called  En  hakkore.^ 

A  visit  which  Samson  paid  to  a  harlot  at  Gaza  led  to  the  city  gates  being 
watched  during  the  night  with  a  view  to  his  capture  in  the  morning ;  but  at 
midnight  he  arose,  and  plucking  up  the  gate-posts,  carried  them,  with  the 
doors  and  bar,  to  the  top  of  a  mountain  east  of  Hebron,  a  distance  of  forty 
miles. 

After  this,  love  for  another  woman  called  Delilah,  who  lived  in  the  valley  of 
Sorek,  again  led  him  into  danger.  Delilah  was  bribed  by  the  lords  of  the 
Philistines  to  draw  from  him  the  secret  of  his  great  strength,  and  after  he  had 
thrice  deceived  her,  he  revealed  to  her  that  his  strength  would  leave  him  if  his 
head  were  shorn.  She  accordingly  had  the  locks  of  his  hair  shorn  while  he 
was  asleep ;  and  when  he  was  thus  weakened,  he  was  overpowered  by  the 
Philistines,  blinded,  and  imprisoned  at  Gaza.  But  in  the  course  of  time  his 
hair  grew  again  ;  and  when  the  Philistines,  on  the  occasion  of  a  festival  held 
in  honour  of  their  god  Dagon,  brought  him  from  prison  to  make  sport  for 
them,  he  seized  the  pillars  upon  which  the  roof  of  the  house,  crowded  with 
sight-seers,  was  supported,  and  bowing  himself  with  all  his  might,  he  broke 
the  pillars,  so  that  the  house  fell  and  destroyed  both  himself  and  his  enemies, 
the  latter  numbering  3,000  men  and  women.  He  was  buried  by  his  friends  in 
the  burying  place  of  his  father  Manoah,  between  Zorah  and  Eshtaol. 

The  account  of  Samson  has  been  explained  by  some  as  a  solar  myth.  The 
name  Samson  (Heb.  Shimshon)  is  connected  with  the  word  shemesh  "sun"  ; 
and  the  hero's  adventure  with  the  lion,  and  his  death  in  the  temple  of  Dagon 
(who  is  regarded  as  a  fish-god  ^)  have  been  taken  to  represent  the  entrance  of 
the  sun  into  the  Zodiacal  constellations  Leo  (in  summer)  and  Pisces  (in  winter) ; 

^  For  the  swarming  of  bees  in  the  carcase  of  a  dead  animal  cf.  the  story  of 
Aristceus  in  Verg.  G.  iv.  548-558. 

^  The  name  probably  means  "the  height  of  Lehi"  (or  the  Jaw),  but  is 
taken  to  mean  "the  casting  away  of  the  jaw." 

^  The  name  may  really  mean  "Partridge  Spring,"  but  is  taken  by  the 
historian  to  signify  "the  spring  of  him  that  called." 

*  By  some  authorities,  however,  Dagon  is  regarded  as  a  corn -god ;  see 
p.  212,  note. 

P 


2IO  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

whilst  the  destruction  of  the  Philistines'  corn  is  interpreted  to  denote  the  effect 
of  drought  and  blight.  By  others  Samson's  career  has  been  compared  with 
that  of  Hercules  (which  itself  is  sometimes  explained  as  a  solar  myth),  both 
heroes  being  characterised  by  courage  in  regard  to  men  and  weakness  in  regard 
to  women.  But  the  introduction  of  solar  or  nature  myths  into  connection 
with  events  so  late  as  the  war  immediately  preceding  the  institution  of 
monarchy  in  Israel  is  highly  improbable  ;  and  the  narrative  doubtless  contains 
a  nucleus  of  fact,  which  tradition  has  amplified  and  exaggerated.  Many  of 
the  details  probably  had  their  origin  in  current  phrases,  poetical  expressions, 
and  local  names  (such  as  those  quoted  or  mentioned  in  xiv.  14,  18,  xv.  16, 
17,  19)  of  which  an  explanation,  when  demanded,  was  supplied  by  popular 
fancy. 

But  the  Philistines  were  too  powerful  an  enemy  for  their 
inroads  to  be  stayed  effectually  by  the  exploits  of  individuals, 
however  brilliant  and  daring;  and  Israel  had  not  yet  found  a 
leader  to  organise  successfully  the  collective  forces  of  the  nation. 
And  foreign  invasion  was  accompanied  by  internal  corruption. 
What  central  authority  existed  was  in  the  hands  of  the  High 
Priest  Eli  at  Shiloh  {i  Sam.  iv.  18),  a  descendant  of  Aaron  in 
the  line  of  Ithamar,^  whose  two  sons  Hophni  and  Phinehas, 
taking  advantage  of  their  father's  great  age,  acted  so  rapaciously 
(if  not  licentiously)  2  that  (according  to  the  existing  narrative)  the 
death  of  both  of  them  by  violence,  and  the  downfall  of  their 
father's  house  were  predicted.^  Nevertheless,  the  advance  of  the 
Philistines  into  the  heart  of  the  country  was  not  accomplished 
without  a  struggle.  Entering  the  territory  of  Israel  by  one  of 
the  southern  passes,  they  were  met  by  the  Israelite  forces  at 
Ebenezer  near  Aphek,*  where  a  battle  was  fought  in  which  the 
Israelites  were  defeated  and  had  to  retire  to  their  camp  with  a 
loss  of  4,000  men.  The  heads  of  the  several  contingents  en- 
gaged determined  as  a  last  resource  to  fetch  the  Ark  from  Shiloh, 
that  it  might  be  with  them  in  the  next  encounter.^    Accordingly 

^  This  is  a  conclusion  derived  from  a  comparison  of  i  Sam.  xxii.  20, 
xiv.  3,  and  /  Ch.  xxiv.  3,  if  Ahimelech  son  of  Ahitub  and  Ahijah  son  of 
Ahitub  can  be  regarded  as  identical.  Eli's  descent  from  Ithamar  is  also 
affirmed  by  Josephus  {Ant.  v.  11,  5). 

^  On  7  Sam.  ii.  22,  see  p.  286,  note. 

'  The  section  /  Sam.  ii.  27-36  reflects  the  conditions  of  the  monarchy 
(see  ver.  35)  and  the  actual  displacement  of  Eli's  descendant  Abiathar  by 
Zadok  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  {i  Kg.  ii.  27). 

*  Its  situation  is  unknown.  Some  authorities  place  Ebenezer  in  the  valley 
of  Sorek ;  if  this  is  correct  the  Aphek  of  iv.  i.  cannot  be  the  Aphek  of 
/  Sam.  xxix.  i.  '  Cf.  Num.  x.  35,  2  Sam.  xi.  II. 


THE  JUDGES  211 

it  was  brought  from  the  sanctuary  by  the  priests  Hophni  and 
Phinehas,  and  enthusiastically  welcomed  by  the  Israelite  host, 
whilst  tidings  of  its  arrival  created  proportionate  dismay  amongst 
the  Philistines.^  The  battle  that  followed,  however,  was  even 
more  disastrous  to  Israel  than  the  previous  one  had  been.  The 
army  was  routed  with  great  slaughter,^  the  Ark  itself  captured, 
and  the  two  priests  slain.  The  calamitous  news  was  carried  to 
Eli,  who  did  not  survive  the  shock  ;3  whilst  it  also  proved  fatal 
to  the  wife  of  Phinehas,  who  was  then  pregnant.  To  the  child 
of  which  she  was  prematurely  delivered,  she  gave,  before  dying, 
the  name  of  Ichabod  ("  Glory  has  departed  ").  From  the  absence 
of  any  subsequent  mention  of  a  sanctuary  at  Shiloh,  and  the 
fact  that  the  main  body  of  priests  was  afterwards  estabHshed  at 
Nob,  it  may  be  concluded  that  Shiloh*  was  assaulted  and  ravaged, 
and  the  tabernacle  destroyed  {d.  fer.  vii.  12-14,  xxvi.  6,  9,  Fs. 
Ixxviii.  60-61). 

The  captured  Ark  was  carried  in  triumph  to  Ashdod  and 
placed  in  the  temple  of  the  god  Dagon.  But  on  successive 
mornings  the  image  of  Dagon  was  found  (it  is  said)  prostrate 
and  mutilated  before  the  Ark  of  Jehovah ;  whilst  the  population 
of  the  city  was  attacked  by  a  plague,  of  which  painful  boils  were 
a  symptom.  The  Ark,  in  consequence,  was  taken,  first  to  Gath, 
and  then  to  Ekron;  but  as  the  plague  that  afflicted  Ashdod 
extended  to  these  cities  also,  the  people  came  to  regard  the 
presence  of  the  Ark  as  fatal,  and  after  it  had  been  only  seven 
months  in  Philistia,  determined  to  send  it  back  to  Israel.  It  was 
placed,  for  removal  from  Ekron,  in  a  cart  drawn  by  kine,  and 
was  accompanied  by  a  guilt-offering  in  the  form  of  five  golden 
plague-boils  and  five  golden  mice,  a  mouse  being  an  emblem 

*  In  /  Sam.  iv.  8  the  Philistine  allusion  to  the  smiting  of  the  Egyptians  by 
plagues  in  the  wilderness  is  probably  due  to  an  erroneous  reading :  the  passage 
should  run  that  smote  the  Egyptians  with  all  manner  of  plagues  attd  with 
pestilence.  The  alteration  in  the  Heb.  is  slight  (see  Driver  or  H.  P.  Smith 
ad  loc. ). 

'  According  to  /  Sam.  iv.  lo  there  fell  30,000  foot-men. 

'  The  Hebrew  of  /  Sam.  iv.  13  represents  Eli  as  seated  by  the  wayside,  in 
which  case  he  would  presumably  have  heard  the  tidings  before  they  reached 
the  city  (contrary  to  ver.  14).  But  the  LXX.  reads  l^ov  'H\t  iirl  toO  8i<ppov 
irapdi  T^v  tiJXt;!'  (i.e.  of  the  Sanctuary),  with  which  ver.  18  agrees. 

^  Shiloh,  as  a  city,  is  mentioned  subsequently  in  /  Kg.  xiv.  2,  4. 


212  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

of  disease  or  pestilence.^  The  conclusion  that  the  God  of  Israel 
was  the  author  of  their  calamities  was  regarded  as  certain  when 
the  kine  drawing  the  cart  turned,  of  themselves,  up  the  valley 
of  Sorek  in  the  direction  of  the  Israelite  frontiers.  The  Ark 
was  received  by  the  inhabitants  of  Bethshemesh  ;  but  a  plague 
(attributed  to  their  having  looked  into  it)^  broke  out  amongst 
them  also,  and  destroyed  seventy  persons.^  It  was  consequently 
transferred  to  Kiriath  Jearim  (or  Kiriath  Baal,y<7j>^.  xv.  60),  one 
of  the  Gibeonite  cities  {Josh.  ix.  17),  situated  further  up  the 
valley,  which,  as  being  a  sanctuary,^  was  considered  to  be  a  more 
fitting  resting-place  for  the  emblem  of  so  holy  and  powerful 
a  God ;  and  there  it  was  bestowed  in  the  house  of  one  Abinadab, 
whose  son  Eleazar  was  sanctified  to  take  charge  of  it. 

^  But  the  LXX.  of  vi.  i  (followed  by  Josephus,  Ant.  vi.  i,  i)  implies  that 
the  golden  mice  had  relation  to  a  plague  of  field-mice  which  devastated  the 
country  (cf.  also  the  Heb,  of  ver.  5).  Dagon,  whose  name  resembles  the 
Hebrew  word  for  "corn"  as  well  as  the  word  for  "fish,"  may  have  been  a 
god  of  agriculture,  and  the  destruction  of  the  com  of  the  Philistines  by  the 
mice  would  indicate  his  inferiority  to  Jehovah. 

2  In  the  LXX.  the  plague  is  ascribed  to  the  failure  of  the  sons  of  a  certain 
Jeconiah  to  rejoice  with  the  rest  of  the  people. 

'  In  the  text  of  /  Sam.  vi.  19  by  some  error  50,000  is  added  to  the  70. 
Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  i,  4)  shows  no  acquaintance  with  the  larger  figure. 

*  This  is  suggested  by  the  name  Kiriath  (city  of)  Baal, 


I 


CHAPTER   VIII 
THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY 

Sources — i  Sam.  i.-iii.,  vii.  2-xxxi.  13,  /  Ch.  x. 

THE  success  of  the  Philistines  at  Ebenezer  enabled  them 
to  tighten  and  extend  their  hold  upon  southern  Israel, 
a  trophy  1  being  erected  at  Gibeah  in  Benjamin  (7  Sam.  x.  5), 
and  a  garrison  placed  in  its  neighbourhood  to  command 
the  defile,  which,  at  this  point,  connected  the  maritime 
plain  with  the  Jordan  valley  (see  xiv.  4-6) :  and  an  attempt,  not 
seemingly  quite  successful,  was  made  to  disarm  the  population 
(xiii.  19  foll.).^  But  Israel  in  its  extremity  at  length  found  the 
leader  so  long  desired.  The  selection  of  the  man  destined  to  be 
the, first  to  beat  back  the  Philistines  from  Israelitish  soil  was  due, 
ui^der  Providence,  to  the  penetration  of  a.  segr  cr  prophet  named 
Sajus^sh,  a  .cof  Elkanah,  of  Ramah^  in  Ephraim.  Samuel  in 
}J?^)jash.i/v.h  reputation  as  a  seer  had  doubtless  obtained  some 
.jtTm;nce  amongst  his  countrymen;  and  his  efforts  were  now 
,  directed  towards  the  deliverance  of  his  native  land.  He  knew 
V  |11  that  the  only  hope  of  Israel  in  the  face  of  so  powerful  a  foe 
/*lay  on  the  one  hand  in  a  revival  of  devotion  towards  the  nation's 
'  God.  and  on  the  other  hand  in  the  acquisition,  as  the  national 
leader,  of  a  man  who  could  inspire  enthusiasm  by  exceptional 
qualities  of   person  and  disposition,  and  who  under  the  style 

1  The  word  here  taken  in  the  sense  of  a  pillar,  erected  as  a  trophy,  also 
mearis  zn  officer ;  and  Jonathan's  exploit  (xiii.  3,  see  p.  218)  may  have  been 
the  slaughter  of  such  an  individual. 

2  Cf.  Jud.  V.  8. 

'     '  In  /  Sam.  i.    i  the  description  of  Elkanah  as  of  Ramathaim  Zophim- 
which  grammatically  is  difficult,  should  probably  be  altered  to  oj  the  Kama- 
^  thiUs,  a  Zuphite.     That  his  home  \;a.%  at  Ramah  appears  from  ver.  19,  ii.  II, 
and  that  this  v^'as  in  the  land  of  Zuph  is  implied  in  ix.  5-6. 

213 


214  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

of  king  (as  contrasted  with  that  of  judge)  might  transmit  his 
authority  to  a  successor  (cf.  Jud.  viii.  22),  and  so  establish  a 
permanent  government.  To  these  objects  he  accordingly  devoted 
himself.  The  measures  he  adopted  for  the  promotion  of  the 
first  can  only  be  conjectured ;  of  the  circumstances  attending  his 
selection  of  a  leader  more  information  is  forthcoming.  His 
!  ■  choice  fell  upon  Saul,  a  Benjamite.  Saul  was  a  man  of  mature 
age^  and  commanding  presence,  and  endowed,  as  his  history  shows, 
both  with  courage  and  generosity :  but  his  tribe  was  the  smallest 
in  Israel,  and  though  his  father  was  a  man  of  wealth,^  his  clan 
was  insignificant,  Samuel,  however,  had  presumably  sounded  the 
feeling  of  the  army  (x.  26),  and  had  assured  himself  of  Saul's 
fitness  for  the  position  to  which  he  was  to  be  preferred.  To  Saul 
Samuel  appears  to  have  been  personally  unknown;  but  in  seeking 
for  some  she-asses  which  his  father^  had  lost,  he  was  brought 
by  his  servant,  after  a  vain  search  elsewhere,  into  Samuel's 
presence  at  Ramah  (probably  the  city  alluded  to  in  ix.  6),  in  the 
hope  that  he  would  guide  them  in  their  quest.  It  chanced  to 
be  a  religious  festival  at  a  neighbouring  "  high-place,"  and  Samuel 
was  expected  to  be  present  to  bless  the  sacrifice.  When  Saul 
came  to  Samuel,  his  questions  relative  to  his  father's  loss  were 
anticipated,  and  the  prophet,  in  no  obscure  terms,  announced 
that  all  that  was  desirable  in  rsrael"^  awaited  hiin.  S^^i  --^^  'led 
his  unworthiness ;  but  Samuel,  taking  him  to  the 
in  the  seat  of  honour,  and  placed  before  him  a  reserved  pou. 
leg  and  the  fat  tail.^  After  the  meal  was  over,  the  prophet  ana 
Saul  left  the  "high-place";  and  Saul  passed  the  night  on  a 
couch  prepared  for  him  on  the  roof  of  one  of  the  city's  house, 
(ix.  25  marg.).6  Both  of  them  departed  from  the  city  in  the 
morning;  but  on  the  way  Saul  was  anointed  by  Samuel''  in  the 

^  His  age  at  this  time  is  not  given  either  by  the  Heb.  or  the  LXX.  ;  but 
he  had  a  son,  Jonathan,  who,  quite  early  in  his  father's  reign,  was  already  a 
warrior  (cf.  p.  218).  ^  For  i  Sam.  ix.  i  marg.  see  ^  l^g.  rv.  20. 

^  In  7-  Sam.  x.  14-16  it  seems  to  be  implied  that  it  was  his  uncle  ':vhose 
asses  were  lost. 

*  In  /  Sam.  ix.  20  the  LXX  has  ra  upaia  rod  'IcrpaiyX. 

'  In  7  Sam.  ix.  24  a  plausible  conjecture  has  substituted  this  for  the  WQffd£ 
tha:  which  was  upon  it  (the  leg).  ^  Cf  2  Sam.  xvi  22. 

'  For  the  anointing  of  a  king  by  a  prophet  cf.  (besides  i  San:  wi  \ 
2  Kg.  ix.  4-6. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE    MONARCHY        215 

name  of  Jehovah  to  be  prince  over  Israel.  Three  signs  were 
indicated,  the  occurrence  of  which  might  confirm  his  faith  in  the 
prophet's  authority;  and  he  was  directed  to  seize  the  first 
opportunity  of  vindicating  his  right  to  rule.  He  was  told 
(i)  that  at  the  sepulchre  of  his  ancestress  RacheP  he  would 
meet  three  men,  who  would  tell  him  that  the  asses  lost  by  his 
father  had  been  found :  (2)  that  at  the  terebinth  of  Tabor,^  three 
other  men  taking  offerings  to  the  sanctuary  of  Bethel  would  give 
a  share  of  them  to  him  in  token  of  homage  (cf.  x.  27,  xvi.  20) : 
(3)  that  at  Gibeah  of  God  (probably  a  sanctuary)  he  would  meet 
a  band  of  prophets  with  instruments  of  music,  whose  enthusiasm 
would  infect  himself,  so  that  he  also  would  prophesy.  The  signs 
described  duly  came  to  pass ;  and  the  prophet's  communications 
and  their  sequel  did  not  fail  to  produce  a  deep  impression  upon 
Saul  so  that,  for  a  time  at  least,  he  became  a  changed  man.  To 
those  previously  acquainted  with  him,  his  participation,  in  particu- 
lar, in  the  ecstatic  fervour  of  the  prophets  seemed  so  strange  that 
it  gave  rise  to  a  proverb,  "Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets?  "^ 

In  the  army,  the  newly-appointed  prince  did  not  lack  support. 
But  he  had  still  to  make  good  his  position  with  a  section  of  the 
nation,  which  continued  to  refuse  him  the  customary  marks  of 
alkgiance.  The  opportunity  of  silencing  these  malcontents  came 
ajbout  a  month  (xi.  i,  LXX.)  after  Samuel  had  anointed  him,  when 
suspesh,  a  /:ity  of  Gilead,  was  attacked  by  the  Ammonite  king 
{^jgljash,  who,  taking  advantage  of  the  distress  inflicted  by  the 
resembVln'es  on  the  west  of  Jordan,  had  renewed  the  raids  which 
^^^^'  -4  had  suffered  in  the  time  of  Jephthah.  Nahash  refused 
relay^are  the  citizens  except  on  condition  that  they  each  sub- 
l  to  the  loss  of  the  right  eye  ;*  and  the  leaders  of  the  town 

I  Sam.  X.  2  Rachel's  tomb  is  placed  within  the  borders  of  Benjamin, 
/er.  xxxi.  15  it  is  implied  that  it  was  near  Ramah  j  but  in  Gen.  xxxv. 
16,  19  it  is  placed  near  Bethlehem,  south  of  Jerusalem. 
*  .rt^-n  unknown  locality  between  Bethel  (x.  3)  and  Gibeah  (ver.  5  marg.) 
^  Th<e   question  in   i  Sam.   x.    12,   And  who  is  their  father?  expresses 
further   "surprise.     The  prophets  to  whom  Saul  joined  himself  were  attached 
to  no  prominent  or  well-known  leader  {father  being  correlative  to  son  in  the 
common  phrase  sons  of  the  prophets. 

*  Josejghus  {Ant.  vi.  5,  i)  explains  that  in  battle  the  left  eye  was  covered 
by  the  shield,  so  that  the  loss  of  the  right  would  render  the  man  quite  useless 
for  war. 


2i6  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

had  undertaken  to  capitulate  within  seven  days,  if  help  did  not 
come.  Messengers  from  the  beleaguered  city  reached  Gibeah,^ 
where  Saul,  who  had  returned  to  his  farm  (xi.  5),  was  Hving; 
and  on  learning  their  communication,  he  rose  to  the  occasion, 
assumed  the  position  of  prince,  and  hewing  a  yoke  of  oxen  in 
pieces,  sent  them  throughout  the  land  (after  the  manner  of  the 
fiery  cross  of  the  Scottish  clans).  The  summons  was  answered, 
and  a  force  (the  size  of  which,  300,000  Israelites  and  30,000  men 
of  Judah,  must,  especially  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  land  was 
still  largely  under  the  domination  of  the  Philistines,  be  grossly 
exaggerated)  2  gathered  in  Bezek^  and  was  led  by  Saul  to  the 
rescue  of  Jabesh.  A  successful  attack  in  the  early  morning  was 
made  on  the  Ammonite  camp ;  and  the  besieging  army  was  com- 
pletely dispersed.  The  victory  at  once  rendered  Saul  so  popular 
that  a  clamour  was  raised  for  the  punishment  of  those  who  had 
refused  allegiance ;  but  Saul  magnanimously  declined  to  mar  his 
triumph  by  any  act  of  revenge  {i  Sam,  ix.  i-x.  16,  x.  26-xi.  15). 

In  the  account  of  Samuel  and  the  part  he  took  in  Saul's  accession  to  the 
throne  which  is  contained  in  /  Sam.,  there  are  numerous  passages  which  are 
more  or  less  inconsistent  with  the  description  given  above.     Thus  (i)  iij 
c  i.-iii.,   Samuel  instead  of  being  a  comparatively  undistinguished  seer,  t 
whom  application  is  made  for  help  to  find  some  strayed  asses  for  a  trifling 
fee,  and  who  is  unknown  to  Saul,  is  represented  in  altogether  a  diffeiant 
light.     His  birth  was  in  response  to  the  prayer  of  his  mother  Hannah,  wUo 
had  long  been  barren,  and  who,  according  to  her  vow  that,  if  a  son  we/*"-^ 
granted  her,  he  should  be  a  Nazirite,  dedicated  him  from  his  ".radle  to"' 
service  of  Jehovah.*     He  was  accordingly  named  SamueP  and  brought  uj 
Shiloh  under  the  High  Priest  Eli,   to  be  minister  in  the   sanctuary  t^ 
Whilst  yet  a  child  he  received  a  revelation  from  Jehovah,   intimatLy^  j^ 
punishment  would  fall  upon  Eli  for  his  neglect  to  restrain  his  sons 
subsequently  he  become  known  as  a  prophet  throughout  all  IsraeL     t   ^^   ^ 

OUSc 

*  The  existence  of  ties  of  sympathy  between  Jabesh  Gilead  and  the  peovie 
of  Benjamin  is  implied  \wjud.  xxi.  8  foil. 

^  The  LXX.  increases  them  to  600,000  (Josephus  700,000)  and  70,000 
respectively. 

*  Almost  opposite  Jabesh,  on  the  road  firom  the  south  to  the  fords  rvf 
Bethshan. 

*  Hannah's  song  (/  Sam.  ii.  l-io)  in  its  present  form  is  not  in  Ikeeping 
with  the  circumstances  of  the  time,  since  ver.  10  implies  the  existences  of  the 
monarchy.  In  ver.  2,  instead  of  there  is  nom  beside  thee,  the  LXX.  reaidc 
OVK  iffTL  5kaios  a«  6  Beds  rjfiwp. 

'  From  the  explanation  of  the  name  (put  into  the  mouth  of  Hannah  in 
I  Sam.  i.  20),  Because  I  have  asked  him  of  Jehovah,  the  etymology  is  pre- 
sumably taken  to  be  God  hath  heard ;  but  in  reality  it  is  name  of  God. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        217 

vii.  3-14  Samuel  at  Mizpah  ^  promises  to  the  people,  on  their  turning  from 
strange  gods  to  Jehovah,  an  immediate  deliverance  from  the  Philistines,  who, 
instead  of  continuing  to  render  by  their  oppressions  the  need  of  a  king  in- 
creasingly urgent,  are  described  as  being  defeated  in  a  battle  at  Ebenezer^ 
(the  scene  of  the  Israelite  disaster  in  c.  iv.)  in  which  their  discomfiture  is 
aided  by  a  violent  thunderstorm,  and  as  being  driven  beyond  the  borders  of 
Israel  and  losing  some  of  their  own  cities.  (3)  In  vii.  15-viii.  22  Samuel  is 
represented  as  a  Judge,  going  on  circuit  to  administer  justice,  and  visiting  in 
turn  Bethel,  Gilgal,  and  Mizpah,  whence  he  returned  to  his  home  at  Ramah. 
In  old  age,  he  deputes  his  sons  Joel  and  Abijah  to  discharge  his  duties  at  a 
distant  locality  like  Beersheba ;  and  it  is  in  consequence  of  their  corruption 
that  the  people  desire  the  appointment  of  a  king  (which  instead  of  being 
divinely  directed  as  a  means  for  delivering  the  country  from  its  invaders,  is 
regarded  as  contrary  to  the  Divine  will)  and  persist  in  their  demand  in  spke 
of  a  highly-coloured  picture  of  regal  rapacity  drawn  by  Samuel.  (4)  In 
X.  17-25,  xii.,  Saul,  instead  of  being  nominated  and  privately  anointed 
king  by  Samuel  at  Ramah,  is  elected  by  lot  at  a  general  assembly  of  the 
people  at  Mizpah,  the  prophet  in  a  subsequent  address  reproaching  the  people 
for  their  ingratitude  to  Jehovah,  whose  anger  is  indicated  by  a  storm  of 
thunder  and  rain  in  the  time  of  wheat  harvest. 

These  discrepancies  point  to  the  existence  of  two  divergent  narratives 
respecting  Samuel  and  his  earliest  relations  with  Saul,  which  are  only 
partially  reconciled  in  the  small  section  xi.  14-15,  in  which  the  kingdom  is 
said  to  be  "renewed"  at  Gilgal,^  where  Saul  was  made  king.  That  the 
representation  adopted  in  the  text  is  superior  to  the  other  in  historical 
iccuracy  iv.  probable  on  two  grounds,  (i)  It  contains  a  term  {seer)  which,  to  the 
inal  editor  of  the  Dock  seemed  to  require  an  explanation  (ix.  9),  and  is  there- 
pre  presumably  old.  (2)  The  relations  between  Israel  and  the  Philistines 
nplied  in  it,  as  compared  with  the  complete  overthrow  of  the  latter  described 
I  the  variant  narrative,  is  in  closer  agreement  with  the  aggression  of  the 
Philistines  and  the  dismay  produced  by  them  amongst  the  Israelites  in  the 
reign  of  Saul  (see  xiii.  3  foil.,  xiv.  21).  Moreover  the  protest  against 
monarchy,  put  into  the  mouth  of  Samuel  in  viii.  11-18,  corresponds  rather 
suspiciously  to  the  painful  experiences  gained  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  ;  and 
the  prophet's  s^Deech  in  c.  xii.,  besides  being  remarkable  for  the  inclusion 
his  own  name  in  an  enumeration  of  judges  and  deliverers,  has  points 
resemblance  in  thought  and  diction  with  writings  of  a  comparatively  late 
date.  4 

X.  8  is  out  of  place  in  its  present  context.  It  forms  part  of  the  incident 
related  in  xiii.  8-14. 

The  reputation  for  courage  and  conduct  which  Saul  thus  won 

-abled  him  to  enter  upon  the  task  for  which  he  had  been  raised 

lo  the-  throne,  namely,   the  deliverance  of   the  land  from   the 

*  In  Benjamin,  a  short  distance  N.E.  of  Jerusalem. 

"^  The  name  F.benezer  ("the  stone  of  help")  is  here  accounted  for  by  the 
erection  by  Samuel  of  a  stone,  with  the  words  hitherto  hath  Jehovah  helped  us, 

'  Presumably  the  Gilgal  in  the  Jordan  valley  {Josh.  iv.  19),  not  the  Gilgal 
in  mount  Ephraim  {2  Kg.  ii.  i). 

*  Cf.  xii.  21  {things  which  cannot  profit)  w\i\\  Jer.  ii.  8,  1 1,  xvi.  19,  Hab. 
ii.  18,  2  Is.  xliv.  9,  10 ;  and  ver.  22  [for  His  great  name's  sake)  with  Ezek, 
\cx.  9,  2  Is.  xlviii.  9,  and  cf.  p.  455.     But  see  alsoy<?J^.  vii.  9. 


of^ 

of ; 


2i8  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Philistines.  The  time  and  occasion  had  to  be  carefully  chosen : 
consequently  no  general  levy  of  the  people  was  yet  made,  but 
a  body  of  3,000  men  was  stationed  under  the  command  of  the 
king  and  his  son  Jonathan  at  such  posts  of  observation  as 
Michmash,  Bethel,  and  Gibeah  (or  Geba).^  Thesignal  for  the 
rising  was  given  by  the  destruction  by  Jonathan  of  the  trophy^ 
set  up  by  the  PhiUstines  at  Gib«ah ;  on  the  report  of  which  the 
people  flocked  to  arms.  The  Philistines  on  their  part  were  ribf 
slow  to  answer  the  challenge,  and  took  the  field  with  a  large 
force,2  which  included  a  body  of  Israelites  who  served,  no  doubt, 
under  compulsion.  Saul  fell  back  before  their  advance;  and 
abandoning  the  post  at  Michmash,  which  the  enemy  occupied 
(xiii.  16),  retired  to  Gibeah.  But  the  demoralisation  produced 
by  the  long  years  of  Philistine  domination  was  such  that  the 
approach  of  the  Philistine  forces  struck  dismay  into  the  hearts 
of  the  Israelite  levies.-  Some  of  the  population  had  already  with- 
drawn across  the  Jordan  into  Gad  and  Gilead  ;  and  numbers  now 
began  to  desert  the  king,  concealing  themselves  in  caveS; , thickets, 
and  other  places  of  shelter. 

Saul's  army  ultimately  melted  away  to  600  men;  but  with 
these  he  held  his  ground  at  Gibeah.  Here  they  were  close  by 
the  Philistine  position  at  Michmash,  separated  from  it  only  by  a 
deep  ravine :  and  saw  the  marauding  bands  of  the  enemy  depart 
on  pillaging  expeditions  north,  west,  and  east.  ^  The  adventurous 
spirit  of  Jonathan  led  him,  accompanied  only  by  his  armour- 
bearer,  to  cross  the  defile  and  to  show  himself  to  the  enemy. 
Taking  the  challenge  to  advance  further,  which  was  thrown  at 
them  by  the  Philistine  soldiers,  as  an  indication  that  Jehovah  had 
delivered  the  foe  into  their  hands,  they  chmbed  up  the  cHflf;  and 
their  daring  attack,  in  which  Jonathan  and  his  comrade  slew 
twenty  men,  struck  a  panic  among  the  defenders,  which  gradually 

^  In  /  Sam.  xiii.  xiv.  the  names  Gibeah  and  Geba  are  frequently  inter- 
changed, though  probably  one  and  the  same  place  is  intended.  The  localities 
are  distinguished  mjosh.  xviii.  24,  28,  Is.  x.  29,  but  were  doubtless  near  each 
other.     There  is  a  Uke  confusion  m.Jud.  xx,  (cf.  ver.  9  with  10  marg.). 

2  In  /  Sam.  xiii.  5  stated  at  30,000  chariots  and  6,000  horsemen  ;  but  the 
number  of  chariots  is  enormous,  and  quite  out  of  proportion  to  the  number 
usually  employed  (contrast  yi^.  iv.  3). 

^  The  Ophrah  of  xiii.  17  is  almost  directly  north  of  Michmash.  The 
position  of  Zcboini  is  unknown. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        219 

spread  to  the  whole  camp,  the  dismay  being  heightened,  seem- 
ingly, by  a  shock  of  earthquake.  The  disorder  being  observed 
by  Saul  and  his  followers,  the  king's  first  impulse  was  to  consult 
the  will  of  Jehovah  by  means  of  the  ephod,^  which  was  in  the 
care  of  Ahijah,  great-grandson  of  Eli,  to  learn  whether  he  should 
go  to  Jonathan's  help.  But  as  the  tumult  in  the  camp  of  the 
Philistines  mcreased,  he  could  not  control  his  impatience,  and 
bidding  the  priest  desist  before  the  enquiry  was  complete,  he 
directed  an  advance  to  be  made.  The  Philistines,  in  their 
confusion,  turned  their  arms  against  one  another,  and  their  dis- 
comfiture was  increased  by  the  contingent  of  Hebrews  amongst 
them  joining  their  countrymen.  The  pursuit  was  taken  up  by 
numbers  of  Israelites  who  had  sought  refuge  among  the  hills  of 
Ephraim ;  and  the  broken  foe  fled  in  the  direction  of  Beth-aven, 
and  thence  down  the  valley  of  Aijalon.  But  the  effectiveness  of 
the  pursuit  was  impaired  by  a  rash  utterance  of  Saul's,  who,, 
flushed  with  success,  had  imprecated  a  curse  upon  anyone  who 
touched  food  until  the  evening  brought  with  it  a  cessation  of  the 
Battle.  At  nightfall  the  hungry  soldiers  threw  themselves  upon 
the  spoil,  and  in  their  haste  broke  the  religious  ordinance  which 
forbade  the  eating  of  flesh  until  the  blood  had  been  offered  to 
the  Deity.  The  king,  on  learning  what  was  being  done,  extem- 
porised an  altar  out  of  a  great  stone,  and  directed  that  the  people 
should  slaughter  the  animals  there,  and  so  avoid  the  guilt  that 
would  otherwise  attach  to  them. 

Saul,  intent  upon  following  up  the  victory,  proposed  to  make 
a  night  attack  upon  the  discomfited  enemy,  and  accordingly 
consulted  the  priestly  oracle.  To  his  dismay  no  answer  was 
vouchsafed ;  and  the  displeasure  of  Jehovah,  thus  believed  to  be 
indicated,  was  at  once  attributed  to  some  undetected  sin  either 
of  the  king  and  his  son,  or  of  the  people.  Appeal  was  made  to 
the  arbitrament  of  the  sacred  lot,  the  Un'm  and  Thummim;  and 
it  was  declared  that  the  guilt  lay  between  the  king  and  Jonathan.  ^ 

^  In  /  Sam.  xiv.  l8  the  LXX.  B  has  irpoadyaye  rb  i<po68  '  Sri  airrbi  ^pev  rb 
i<po6S  iv  T7/  T)fiipq.  eKeivT}  eutvinov  'laparjk. 

'^  In  7  Sam.  xiv.  41  the  LXX.  reads  ^  iv  i/xol  ■^  iu  l(>}vadb,v  t(J5  viip  fiov  ij 
dSiKia  ;  Kvpie  6  debs  lapaijK,  bos  b-ffKovs  {Uritn).  Kol  ib.v  rdbe  eiwg,  bbs  bi]  ry 
Xoy  ffov  laparjX,  bbs  5^  baibrrjTa  {Thummim), 


220  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

A  further  appeal  resulted  in  Jonathan  being  named;  and  the 
young  warrior  confessed  that  he  had  incurred  the  curse  which 
the  king  had  pronounced  in  the  course  of  the  pursuit.  Coming 
worn  and  spent  to  a  place  where  honey  was  dropping  from  the 
trees,  he  had  tasted  it,  ignorant  of  the  peril  to  which  his  act 
exposed  him.  The  stern  king  directed  the  execution  of  his  son. 
But  the  soldiery,  mindful  that  it  was  Jonathan's  heroism  that  first 
inspired  the  panic  of  the  Philistine  host,  intervened  to  save  from 
death  the  man  whom  Jehovah  had  so  signally  aided;  and  so 
Jonathan's  Hfe  was  preserved.  The  delay  that  occurred  pre- 
vented the  Israelites  from  following  up  their  advantage ;  and  the 
king  desisted  from  further  pursuit. 

The  continuation  of  the  PhiUstine  war  is  unfortunately  left  in 
almost  complete  obscurity,  though  there  are  indications  that 
hostilities  between  the  two  nations  were  protracted.  The  exist- 
f  in^^ecords  of  Saul's  reign  furnish  equally  little  information 
respecting  his  relations  with  other  neighbouring  nations.  Besides 
the  war  with  the  Ammonites^  (with  whom  the  Moabites  were 
probably  allied),  mention  is  made  (xiv.  47-48)  of  wars  with  Edom, 
Zobah  (a  Syrian  state  E.  of  the  Lebanons),  and  the  Amalekites. 
Neither  the  cause  nor  the  course  of  these  wars  is  described ;  and 
it  is  impossible  to  determine  whether  Edom  and  Zobah  took  advan- 
tage of  the  Philistines'  inroads  to  assume  the  offensive  towards 
Israel,  or  whether  Saul  anticipated  his  successor  by  invading  these 
countries,  though  the  former  is  the  more  probable  alternative.  It 
seems  safe  to  conclude  that  hostilities  with  Amalek  were  provoked 
by  raids  on  the  part  of  these  restless  Bedouin,  such  as  are  recorded 
in  connection  with  a  later  date  (xxx.  i). 

In  his  foreign  wars  Saul  won  distinction  both  for  himself  and 
his  country  (xiv.  47  end).  Internally,  the  course  of  events  was 
,'  less  happy  for  him.  With  a  view  to  consolidating  his  kingdom, 
and  especially  to  uniting  Judah  more  closely  with  the  northern 
tribes,  he  appears  to  have  made  an  attempt  to  put  an  end  to  the 
independent  position  still  enjoyed  by  the  Gibeonite  cities.  It-  has 
been  supposed  that  they  were  suspected  of  faciUtating  the  aggres- 

*  Probably  the  struggles  of  the  Gadites  and  Reubenites  with  the  Hagrites 
in  the  time  of  Saul,  related  in  /  Ch.  v.  10,  18-22,  belong  to  this  war,  though 
the  Hagrites  were  presumably  descendants  of  Ishmael,  not  (like  Ammon)  of 
Lot  ^see  Gen.  xxv.  1 3- 15). 


THE   RISE   OF  THE    MONARCHY         221 

sions  of  the  Philistines,  which  their  situation  would  enable  them 
to  do :  and  in  any  case  their  continued  existence  interfered  with 
the  union,  if  it  did  not  endanger  the  security,  of  the  newly- 
established  kingdom.  _Saul  adopted  harsh  measures  towards 
them,  part  of  the  population  being  put  to  .the  sword,,  whilst  the 
rest  (the  citizens  of  Beeroth  are  expressly  named)  were  expelled 
and  took  refuge  elsewhere.  But  the  policy  was  regarded  as  a 
breach  of  the  ancient  pledge  given  by  Israel  in  the  days  of 
Joshua ;  and,  as  will  be  seen,  was  thought  at  a  later  time  to  have 
brought  a  curse  upon  the  country  (2  Sam.  xxi.  1-14).  More- 
over, a  serious  division  took  place  between  him  and  the  prophet 
Samuel,  to  whom,  in  the  first  instance,  he  owed  his  elevation. 
The  history  of  the  rupture  between  them  is,  like  so  much  else, 
obscure ;  for  neither  of  the  two  conflicting  accounts  preserved  is  ' 
free  from  difficulty.  But  both  imply  that  Saul  was  wanting  in 
the  scrupulous  obedience  expected  to  be  rendered  to  one  who 
claimed,  and  was  generally  recognised,  to  be  the  interpreter  of 
the  Divine  will.  Between  the  prophet  who  was  invested  with 
such  high  spiritual  authority,  and  the  king  who  was  the  repre- 
sentative of  temporal  power,  friction  was  almost  inevitable,  unless 
the  latter  was  a  man  who  was  prevailingly  actuated  by  religious 
motives^  ""And  such  a  m?in  Saul  manifestly  was  not.  That  he 
was  not  naturally  responsive  to  religious  impressions  and  in- 
fluences is  implied  by  the  popular  saying  already  quoted,  "Is 
Saul  also  among  the  prophets  ? "  whilst  more  than  one  incident 
in  his  career  indicates  that  he  was  by  temperament  impulsive  and 
headstrong.  Consequently,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the  king  and 
the  prophet  became  in  course  of  time  estranged,  or  that  Samuel, 
conscious  that  Israel's  mission,  as  a  nation,  was  inseparably  bound 
up  with  loyalty  to  Jehovah,  began  to  seek  a  successor  for  one  who 
so  deepW  disappointed  his  hopes. 

According  to  one  account  (xiii.  4-15),^  the  occasion  of  the  quarrel  between 
them  was  the  Philistine  war.  Samuel  had  directed  Saul  to  await  his 
presence  at  Gilgal  before  advancing  to  the  attack.      The  time  appointed, 

^  This  passage,  which  represents  Saul  at  Gilgal  (ver.  4,  7),  is  inconsistent 
with  its  context,  for  in  the  verses  immediately  preceding  and  following,  Saul 
is  at  Michmash  or  Geba  (Gibeah)  (see  ver.  2,  16),  without  any  indication  of  a 
movement  to  Gilgal  having  intervened.  The  LXX.  suppHes  a  clause  relating 
that  the  people  went  up  after  Saul  from  Gilgal  to  Gibeah,  but  does  not  explain 


222  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

however,  arrived,  and  Samuel  did  not  appear;  so  Saul,  fearing,  perhaps,  that 
if  he  delayed  further  he  would  be  a  general  without  an  army  (for  his  troops 
were  deserting),  himself  offered  the  sacrifice  customary  before  taking  the  field. 
Samuel,  who  came  immediately  after  he  had  done  this,  rebuked  him  for 
disobedience  to  the  command  of  Jehovah,  and  declared  that  the  throne  to 
which  he  had  been  promoted  should  not  remain  in  the  possession  of  his 
house.     If  it  is  meant  that  Saul,   by  offering  sacrifice,  assumed  a  function 

(which  it  was  not  lawful  for  him  to  discharge,  the  implication  conflicts  with 
the  conclusions  drawn  from  passages  like  /  Sam.  xiv.  35,  2  Sam.  vi,  17,  and 
others.  More  probably,  it  is  implied  that  Saul  by  hastening  to  offer  sacrifice 
as  soon  as  the  term  set  by  Samuel  had  expired,  instead  of  obeying  strictly 
the  prophet's  injunction  to  await  his  arrival,  misconceived  the  relative  value 
of  obedience  and  sacrifice ;  so  that  the  moral  of  the  narrative  is  the  same  as 
that  of  the  variant  account  in  c.  xv.  (see  ver.  22). 

This  second  account  makes  the  war  with  Amalek  the  occasion  of  Samuel's 
breach  with  Saul,  and  the  consequent  downfall  of  the  latter's  djoiasty.  In 
it  Samuel,  inspired  by  religious  zeal  and  the  memory  of  ancient  national 
wrongs  (see  Ex.  xvii,  8-16,  cf.  Deut.  xxv.  17-19),  desired  Saul  to  exterminate 
the  offending  tribes.  The  Amalekites,  against  whom  the  attack  was  directed, 
were  those  who  were  settled  in  the  south  of  Judah  {Num.  xiii.  29) ;  and 
accordingly  Saul  mustered  an  army  (the  numbers,  210,000  in  all,  are  again 
exaggerated^)  in  Telaim  (probably  the  Telem  oi  Josh.  xv.  24),  and  after 
bidding  the  Kenites  who  were  settled  in  the  district  {Jud.  L  16)  depart  from 
the  country,  proceeded  to  put  the  Amalekites  to  the  sword.  But  the  king, 
instead  of  consigning  to  indiscriminate  destruction  everything  animate  per- 
taining to  the  enemy,  spared  their  king  Agag  and  the  chief  of  the  spoil  On. 
Saul's  return  through  Carmel  (a  city  in  Judah  south  of  Hebron,  c£  xxv.  2) 
to  Gilgal,  Samuel  rebuked  him  for  disobedience  to  the  Divine  command, 
declared  that  Jehovah  rejected  him  from  being  king,  and  himself  executed 
Agag  at  the  sanctuary'  at  GilgaL  This  narrative  shows  no  acquaintance  with 
the  earlier  rejection  recorded  in  x.  8,  xiii.  8-14,  of  which,  as  has  been  said, 
it  appears  to  be  a  doublet.  The  wholesale  extermination  of  Amalek  which 
it  describes  is  inconsistent  with  the  subsequent  mention  of  this  people  in 
xxvii.  8,  XXX.  I,  cf.  also  2  Sam.  i.  8;  whilst  the  statement  that  Samuel  did 
not  again  see  Saul  (xv.  35)  is  seemingly  contradicted  by  xix.  22-24. 

The  rupture  between  Samuel  and  Saul  did  not  lead  the  former 
to  ^attempt  the  dethronement  of  the  king.  What  the  prophet 
believed  to  be  required  by  the  Divine  will  was  the  transference 
of  the  crown  at  Saul's  death  to  another  family  j  and  with  a  view 
to  this,  he  took  steps  similar  to  those  which  he  adopted  in  the 
case  of  Saul  himself.  It  was  clearly  necessary  to  look  for  a 
\y^  successor  to  Saul  outside  the  tribe  of  Benjamin  to  which  Saul 
belonged;  and  under  such  circumstances  the  prophet  might 
have  been  expected  to  turn  to  his  own  tribe  of  Ephraim.     But 

how  Saul  and  his  followers  came  to  be  at  Gilgal,  which  was  in  the  Jordan 
valley,  after  having  previously  occupied  a  commanding  situation  at  Michmash 
or  Gil^eah. 

^  The  LXX.  increases  them  to  430,000. 

"  For  the  phrase  btfart  /ehovah  in  this  connection  see  »  Sam.  xxi.  9. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        223 

Ephraim,  which  had  been  so  powerful  in  the  age  of  the  Judges, 
had  not  recovered  from  the  disaster  of  Ebenezer.  It  was  there- 
fore in- Benjamin's  southern  neighbour  Judah  that  Samuel  sought 
for  a  successor  to  Saul ;  and  his  choice  fell  upon  a  member  of  the 
^family  of  Jesse,  a  B6thlehemite.  Jesse  was  partly  of  Moabite 
ancestry,  his  father  Obed  being  the  son  of  Boaz,  a  native  of 
Bethlehem,  and  Ruth,  a  Moabitess.  Ruth  had  previously  been 
the  wife  of  a  nephew  of  Boaz,  called  Mahlon ;  and  on  her 
husband's  death,  she  had  refused  to  leave  her  mother-in-law 
Naomi,  and  returned  with  her  to  the  land  of  Israel.  There, 
whilst  gleaning,  she  became  known  to  Boaz,  who,  attracted  by 
her  goodness,  obtained  the  right,  which  a  nearer  relation  relin- 
quished, of  redeeming  the  property  of  the  dead  Mahlon  and 
of  marrying  his  widow  in  order  to  raise  up  an  heir  to  his  name.^ 
It  was  a  descendant  of  this  union,  David,  the  youngest  son  of 
Jesse,  that  Samuel  now  proceeded  to  designate  as  the  future 
king.  Going  to  Bethlehem  ostensibly  to  offer  a  sacrifice,  he 
summoned  the  sons  of  Jesse  to  attend  it.  The  six  eldest,^  one 
after  another,  passed  before  the  prophet,  and  were  successively 
rejected  by  Samuel  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  :  but  when  the 
youngest,  David,  was  brought  from  the  flocks  at  the  bidding  of 
the  prophet,  who  refused  to  proceed  with  the  sacrificial  feast 
until  he  came,  he  was  declared  by  Samuel  to  be  Jehovah's 
choice,  and  was  by  the  prophet  anointed  in  the  midst  of  his 
brethren.  The  anointing  by  Samuel  had  the  same  inspiriting 
influence  upon  David  as  it  had  previously  had  upon  Saul  (cf. 
xvi.  13  with  X.  6),  and  doubtless  led  him,  like  the  latter,  to 
withdraw  to  some  extent  from  the  peaceful  life  of  his  home,  and 
to  enter  upon  a  more  active  career. 

The  historical  character  of  this  account  has  been  questioned,  partly  owing 
to  the  ignorance  shown  of  David's  prospects  by  Eliab,  one  of  his  brothers,  in 
xvii.  28 ;  but  the  latter  chapter  is  itself  suspicious  (see  below). 

^  The  marriage  of  Boaz  with  Ruth  does  not  accord  with  the  law  of  Levirate 
unions  as  described  in  Dgut.  xxv.  5-10,  for  not  only  was  Boaz  the  brother  of 
Elivielech  (not  of  Mahlon),  but  the  son  (Obed)  borne  to  him  by  Ruth  was 
apparently  counted  as  his  own  (and  not  as  the  child  of  Ruth's  first  husband). 

'"^  The  names  of  Jesse's  sons  are  given  in  /  Ch.  ii.  13-15  as  EUab  (Elihu), 
Abinadab,  Shimea  (Shammah),  Nethanel,  Raddai,  Ozem,  and  David  (the 
last  named  appearing  as  the  seventh  son,  not  the  eighth,  as  implied  in  /  Sam, 
xvi.  10- II).     Their  sisters  were  Zeruiah  and  Abigail. 


224  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

/  Of  the  acts  and  exploits  which  first  won  for  David  distinction, 
"^  no  fully  trustworthy  record  remains.  But  they  were  sufficient  to 
secure  for  him  a  reputation  which  quickly  led  to  promotion. 
Saul,  doubtless  embittered  and  disappointed  in  consequence  of 
his  breach  with  Samuel  and  the  announcement  by  the  prophet 
of  his  rejection  by  heaven,  became  subject  to  fits  of  melancholy. 
It  was  believed  by  his  servants  that  his  malady  could  be  banished 
or  lightened  by  music,  and  they  were  accordingly  directed  by  their 
master  to  procure  a  skilful  player  on  the  harp.  David's  name 
by  this  time  had  reached  even  court  circles,  the  king  being 
known  to  desire  the  services  of  every  able  soldier  {i  Sam.  xiv.  52), 
and  it  was  acknowledged  that,  besides  being  distinguished  for 
valour  and  prudence,  he  was  endowed  with  the  gift  of  music. 
Accordingly,  mention  was  made  of  him  to  the  king ;  and  he  was 
summoned  to  his  presence.  He  had  not  yet  altogether 
abandoned  his  shepherd's  life;  and  it  was  from  the  sheep  that 
he  was  brought  to  Saul.  He  won  the  royal  favour  at  once,  and 
the  king  attached  him  to  his  person.  .  His  skill  with  the  harp 
had  the  desired  effect  (xvi.  14-23) ;  and  his  skill  in  arms  made 
Saul  appoint  him  his  armour-bearer.  His  position  gave  him 
opportunities  which  he  speedily  turned  to  account.  Details  of 
his  achievements  in  war  are  again  unfortunately  wanting.  But 
it  is  clear  that  they  were  great  enough  to  overshadow  in  popular 
estimation  even  those  of  the  king  himself.  The  Philistines  were 
still  the  chief  foes  of  Israel,  and  on  one  occasion,  when,  after 
V  a  successful  engagement  (in  which  probably  David  had  slain  a 
^  Philistine  of  gigantic  size  named  Goliath),  a  procession  of  women 
went  forth  with  dance  and  song  to  meet  him,  they  sang  one  to 
another  and  said : — 

"  Saul  hath  slain  his  thousands. 
And  David  his  ten  thousands." 

Another  narrative  of  David's  introduction  to  Saul  (c.  xvii.)  gives  quite 
a  different  account  from  the  above.  According  to  this,  David,  while  still 
a  5'outh,  whose  exploits  had  hitherto  been  confined  to  protecting  his  flocks 
against  the  attacks  of  wild  beasts,^  happened  to  be  sent  by  his  father  to  the 
camp  (where  three  of  his  brothers  were  serving  with  the  king)  just  at  the 
time  when  the  IsraeUtes  were  confronting  a  Philistine  army  near  Ephes- 

^  The  incidents  related  in  /  Sam.  xvii.  34,  35  occurred  (as  the  Hebrew 
tenses  indicate)  more  than  once. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        225 

dammim  in  the  valley  of  Elah.  A  Philistine  of  great  stature,  called  Goliath,  pro- 
posed to  determine  the  quarrel  between  the  two  nations  by  an  appeal  to  single 
combat,  it  being  agreed  that  the  people  whose  representative  was  vanquished 
should  serve  the  other ;  but  none  of  the  Israelite  warriors  was  courageous 
enough  to  accept  the  challenge,  though  the  king  offered  to  bestow  on  the 
champion  who  should  succeed  in  killing  Goliath  great  wealth  and  the  hand 
of  his  daughter.  The  challenge  being  repeated  when  David  was  in  the 
camp,  he  undertook  to  fight  with  the  Philistine,  in  spite  of  his  brothers' 
sneers  at  his  youthfulness ;  and  after  putting  off  the  armour  with  which  Saul 
clad  hiiii  tc\Rc^  he  found  it  burdened  him  to  walk  in  it),^  he  went  to  the 
combat  armed  with  his  shepherd's  club  and  sling  only ;  and  smiting  Goliath 
with  a  stone  from  the  sling,  finally  cut  off  his  head  with  his  own  sword. 
The  Philistines,  seeing  their  champion  fallen,  fled,  and  were  pursued  by 
the  Israelites  from  Shaaraim'  as  far  as  Gath  (so  LXX.)  and  Ekron.  The 
head  of  Goliath  David  brought  to  Jerusalem,  whilst  his  armour  he  placed  in 
his  own  tent.  Saul,  on  seeing  David  advance  against  the  giant,  had  enquired 
of  Abner,  the  captain  of  the  host,  who  he  was.  Abner  denied  all  knowledge 
of  him  ;  but  after  his  victory,  he  brought  him  to  Saul,  who  learnt  his  parentage, 
and  then  took  him  into  his  service,  setting  him  over  his  men  of  war. 

In  representing  David,  on  his  first  appearance  before  Saul,  as  a  youth 
unskilled  in  the  use  of  arms  (xvii.  33,  39)  and  quite  unknown  to  the  captain 
of  the  host  (xvii.  55),  the  account  is  inconsistent  with  the  version  adopted  in 
the  text,  ver.  15  being  probably  an  intentional,  and  certainly  an  unsuccessful,    • 
attempt  to  harmonise  the  general  tenor  of  the  chapter  with  the  statements  | 
relating  to  David's  connection  with  Saul  in  xvi.  19  foil.    Moreover  the  tone  in 
which  David  is  addressed  by  his  brothers  agrees  ill  with  their  knowledge  of  . 
his  anointing  by  Samuel  (xvi.   I-13) ;  the  subsequent  description  of  David's  f 
marriage  with  Saul's  daughter  (xviii.  20  foil. )  shows  no  acquaintance  with  the 
promise  here  recorded ;  and  as  there  is  no  trace  in  the  later  history  of  the 
terms  of  Goliath's  challenge  being  kept,  the  historical  value  of  this  account   1 
seems  inferior.     The  allusion  to  David's  tent  in  ver.   54  is  strangely  out 
of  keeping  with  the  rest  of  the  chapter. '    One  of  the  chief  MSS.   of  the 
LXX.  omits  xvii.  12-31  and  xvii.  55-xviii.  5,  and  so  renders  the  narrative 
more  consistent  with  what  is  related  in  c  xvi.  (end) ;  but  the  discrepancy 
caused  by  xvii.  33  foil,  is  not  removed. 

Yet  in  spite  of  the  difiiculty  in  accepting  the  statements  of  this  section, 
it  is  probable  (as  has  been  already  observed)  that  David  slew  a  Philistine 
giant  called  Goliath,  for  allusions  to  such  an  exploit  occur  in  xix.  5,  xxi.  9 ; 
and  a  passage  relating  the  incident  may  have  been  omitted  in  favour  of  the 
(less  trustworthy)  account  given  in  c.  xvii.  Reference  is  also  made  in  /  Ch. 
xi.  12-14  (cf.  ^  Sam.  xxiii.  9-10)  to  a  signal  victory  gained  over  the 
Philistines  in  Ephes-dammim  (Pas-dammim)  by  David,  accompanied  by 
Dodo  the  Ahohite,  though  Goliath  is  not  there  mentioned.  In  2  Sam. 
xxi.  19,  where  a  victory  over  a  Goliath  is  related,  it  is  attributed  to  a  warrior 
named  El-hanan.* 

^  In  7  Sam.  xvii.  39  for  Ag  essayed  to  go  the  LXX.  has  iKOTricuxe  TtptTrarT/'o-as 
&M  Kal  5/$.  3  Cf./osk.  XV.  36. 

'  Josephus  {Anf.  vi.  9,  5)  represents  that  David  after  his  encounter  with 
Goliath,  placed  the  PhiUstine's  head  in  his  tent  and  dedicated  his  sword  to 
God  (presumably  at  a  sanctuary),  and  according  to  /  Sam.  xxi.  9  the  sword 
was  really  preserved  at  Nob. 

*  I  Ch.  XX.  5,  probably  for  harmonistic  reasons,  calls  El-hanan's  victim 
Lahtni  the  brother  of  Goliath  ;  see  p.  251,  note. 


226  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  popularity  which  David  thus  acquired  excited  the  king's 

jealousy,  and  he  accordingly  removed  him  from  attending  upon 

his  person,  and  made  him  captain  over  a  "thousand."     In  this 

capacity  David  conducted  himself  with  increasing  credit;  and 

became  a  favourite,  not  only  with  his  own  tribesmen,  but  with 

the  nation  generally.     Even  members  of  Saul's  own  family  grew 

:^  attached  to  him.     XP^t^^">  the  king's  eldest  son.  became  his 

I  devoted  and  loyal  friend  (xix.  i,  cf.  xviii.  3-4),  whilst  Michal, 

Saul's  daughter,  lost  her  heart  to  him.     The  affection  of  the 

latter   for  David  reached  the  king's  ears;  and  he  determined 

to  propose  to  marry  her  to  him,  with  the  intention  of  making 

the  match  a  dangerous  honour.     In  accordance  with  Hebrew 

usage,  ^  the  suitor  was  expected  to  give  a  present  to  the  father 

of  the  bride-to-be ;  and  Saul,  with  seeming  magnanimity,  instead 

of  exacting  a  costly  gift,  which  David,  a  poor  man,  might  have 

found  it  difficult  to  afford,  demanded  that  he  should  bring  him 

the  foreskins  of  a  hundred  Philistines.     The  king's  hope  was 

that  David  might  lose  his  life  in  the  endeavour  to  accomplish 

the  task.     But  his  expectation  was  disappointed.     David  and  his 

men  succeeded  in  slaying  the  number  of  foes  required,^  and 

brought  the  strange  trophies  to  the  king,  who  consequently  had 

to  fulfil  his  promise.     Saul's  hostihty  was  naturally  not  lessened 

by  this  failure.     The  exploit  increased  David's  reputation  with 

the  people ;  but  only  intensified  the  king's  bitterness. 

Here  the  LXX.  B  (which  omits  xviii.  lo-ii,  12b,  17-19,  21b,  30)  has  been 
in  the  main  followed  (as  also  by  Josephus).  The  Hebrew  text  relates  in 
addition  (i)  an  attempt  made  upon  David's  life  by  Saul,  who  cast  his  spear 
at  him,  as  he  played  before  him  (though  the  similar  narrative  in  xix.  9-10 
has  no  reference  to  any  previous  attempt,  and  the  fact,  before  the  less 
invidious  expedient  of  ver.  25  had  been  tried,  is  unhkely) ;  and  (2)  a  proposal 
by  Saul,  prior  to  that  relative  to  Michal,  that  David  should  marry  his  eldest 
daughter  Merab,  who  was  subsequently  given  to  Adriel  the  Meholathite  "^ 
(which  seems  inconsistent  with  David's  language  in  xviii.  23,  betraying,  as  it 
does,  no  sense  of  an  alliance  with  the  royal  house  having  been  previously 
proposed). 

As  David  had  escaped  the  swords  of  the  PhiUstines,  Saul 

^  See  p.  154. 

*  The  Heb.  of  i  Sam.  xviii.  27  represents  David  as  bringing  200,  but  the 
LXX.  has  100,  and  the  same  figure  is  given  by  the  Hebrew  of  2  Sam.  iii.  14. 
Josephus  {Ant.  vi.  10,  2)  substitutes  600  heads. 

*  2  Sam.  xxi.  8  (Heb.)  implies  that  it  was  Michal  who  was  given  to  Adriel, 
but  see  /  Sam.  xviii.  19. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        227 

gave  directions  to  his  own  servants  to  slay  David.  But  the 
design  became  known  to  Jonathan,  who,  after  warning  David, 
pleaded  his  cause  with  the  king,  and  succeeded  by  his  remons- 
trances, in  softening  his  father's  resentment,  and  obtaining  from 
him  a  promise  not  to  put  David  to  death.  He  even  brought 
about  David's  return  to  the  court.  Fresh  successes,  however, 
achieved  by  David  once  more  excited  the  king's  passionate  and  j\ 
jealous  spirit;  and  he  actually  attempted  to  murder  him  with 
his  own  hands.  As  David  was  playing  in  his  presence,  he  sought 
to  smite  him  to  the  wall  with  his  spear ;  but  David,  avoiding  the 
weapon,  made  his  escape  and  went  to  his  own  house.  Over  the 
house  Saul  set  a  watch  with  the  purpose  of  slaying  him  in  the  morn- 
ing. But  Michal,  David's  wife,  let  her  husband  down  through  a 
window  during  the  night,  whilst  she  placed  the  icraphim  (which 
must  have  been  an  image)  in  the  bed  to  represent  him,  and  told 
the  messengers  sent  to  take  him  that  he  was  ill.  On  the  king 
demanding  that  the  sick  man  should  be  brought  to  him  in  his 
bed,  the  fraud  was  discovered;  and  Michal,  to  screen  herself, 
represented  that  her  husband  had  driven  her  to  it  by  threatening 
her  life  (xix.  8-17). 

After  escaping  from  his  house,  David  went  to  Samuel  at 
^amah  (where  he  had  gathered  together  a  company  of  prophets) 
and  related  to  him  all  that  had  happened.  From  Ramah  the 
two  went  to  Naioth,  a  place  near  Ramah,  where  possibly  the 
prophets  lived  together.  Saul  heard  of  David's  presence  at 
Naioth,  and  again  sent  messengers  to  take  him.  But  when  there, 
the  messengers  became  infected  with  the  prophetic  frenzy, 
and  prophesied;  and  the  same  thing  happened  to  others  who 
were  despatched  after  them.  Finally,  the  king  appeared  in 
person,  but  could  as  little  withstand  the  influence  of  his  sur- 
roundings, and  accordingly  prophesied  like  the  rest.  It  would 
seem  that  after  this,  another  reconciliation  must  have  been 
effected  between  him  and  the  king,  for  (according  to  the  account 
of  I  Savi.  c.  XX.),  he  again  appeared  at  the  court  (probably  at 
Gibeah,  see  xxii.  6) ;  but  once  more  he  was  in  peril  from  Saul's 
hostility.  Under  such  circumstances,  he  proposed  to  hide  him- 
self in  the  neighbourhood  for  three  days,  during  which  time 
his  friend  Jonathan  was  to  sound  the  king's  feelings  towards  him. 


228  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

After  inventing  an  excuse  for  his  absence,  in  case  it  was  re- 
marked, and  being  informed  of  a  spot  whither  he  was  to  come 
to  receive  inteUigence,^  and  of  a  device  whereby  Jonathan  pro- 
posed to  communicate  the  results  of  his  discoveries  without 
being  detected  by  possible  spies  of  the  king,  he  withdrew,  whilst 
Saul's  son,  after  exacting  an  oath  from  David  that,  in  the  event 
of  succeeding  to  the  throne,  he  would  not  cut  off  his  predecessor's 
posterity  in  the  usual  fashion  of  Eastern  monarchs,  attended  his 
father  to  await  developments.  The  fact  that  the  day  was  the  New 
Moon  was  the  pretext  for  David's  absence  (xx.  5.  LXX.).  His 
vacant  seat  was  observed  by  Saul ;  but  the  king  did  not  comment 
upon  it  until  the  day  following.  In  answer  to  his  father's  en- 
quiries in  the  course  of  the  meal,  Jonathan,  who  sat  opposite 
to  Saul,2  gave  the  excuse  devised,  namely,  that  David  had  been 
summoned  to  a  yearly  sacrifice  of  his  family  at  Bethlehem.  In 
an  outburst  of  anger,  Saul  upbraided  his  son  for  aiding  the  man 
who,  if  he  lived,  would  supplant  him,  and  hurled  his  spear  at 
him.  Jonathan,  from  this,  knew  that  Saul  was  bent  on  destroying 
David,  and  accordingly  conveyed  the  information  to  him  at 
the  place  and  by  the  plan  agreed  upon.  But  on  finding  the 
coast  clear,  the  two  friends  met  for  a  final  farewell;  and  ther; 
Jonathan  returned  to  the  city,  whilst  David  departed  mto  volun'i 
tary  exile. 

The  connection  of  events  in  cc.  xix.-xx.  is  far  from  clear ;  and  it  is  not 
improbable  that  the  thread  of  the  narrative  is  composed  of  more  than  one 
strand.  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  section  xix.  11-17  is  the  continuation 
of  xviii.  27  (or  29),  the  words  that  night  (ver.  10,  but  in  the  LXX.  attached 
to  ver.  1 1 )  referring  to  David's  marriage  night.  The  fact  that  apprehension 
of  the  danger  is  shown  by  Michal,  and  not  David  (which,  after  what  is 
related  in  ver.  10,  is  not  quite  natural),  is,  on  this  supposition,  intelligible 
enough,  Michal  being  aware  of  her  father's  hostility.  If  this  analysis  is 
correct,  xix.  10  is  continued  in  xix.  18,  and  xix.  17  in  xxi.  I  (where  David 
appears  at  Nob  without  either  food  or  weapons).  Exception  has  been  taken 
to  the  account  of  David's  visit  to  Raraah  on  the  ground  that  this  was  north  of 
Gibeah,  and  not  south  of  it  (the  direction  of  his  home) ;  and  that  the  action 
of  Saul  in  prophesying  in  company  with  Samuel's  followers  is  here  repre- 
sented as  the  source  of  the  proverb  "Is  Saul  also  among  the  prophets?'* 
which  in  x.  11-12  is  assigned  to  a  different  origin.  C.  xx.  harmonises  badly 
with  the  preceding  chapters,  for  David's  presence  at  the  court  implies  a 
reconciliation  between  him  and   Saul  of  which  there  is  no  account  j  and 

^  In  7  Sam.  xx.  19,  41  the  LXX.  reading  is  to  be  preferred,  see  mai^. 
*  In  /  Sam.  xx.  25  the  LXX.  for  stood  up  reads  xpoitpdaa^v,  representing  a 
Hebrew  word  to  come  (or  be)  in  front. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        229 

Jonathan's  ignorance  of  his  father's  hostility  to  David  (ver.  2)  is  surprising. 
It  presents,  besides,  some  internal  difficulties ;  e.g.  the  expedient  arranged  by 
Jonathan  for  conveying  information  to  David  which  is  described  in  ver. 
20-22,  35-40,  seems  rather  unnecessary,  if  the  two  could  meet  as  related 
in  41-42. 

David  naturally  turned  southward  towards  his  native  land  of 
Judaea,  and  directed  his  steps  to  Nob,  to  which  place  the 
tabernacle,  the  ephod,  and  other  equipments  of  the  sanctuary, 
after  the  destruction  of  Shiloh,  had  perhaps  been  conveyed,^ 
and  where  they  were  now  in  the  charge  of  the  priest  Ahimelech. 
The  suspicions  which  had  been  roused  by  his  being  unattended 
he  removed  by  alleging  that  he  was  engaged  on  a  secret 
mission  from  the  king,  and  that  he  had  bidden  his  attendants 
await  him  at  a  rendezvous.  He  then  procured  from  Ahimelech 
provisions  for  his  journey  ^  (though  the  only  bread  obtainable 
was  the  Shewbread),  and  the  sword  of  Goliath,  together  with 
a  response  from  the  Divine  oracle  (xxii.  13).  From  Nob  he 
proceeded  to  Gath,  to  take  refuge  with  Achish  the  king  there. 
But  David  was  recognised  by  the  Philistines  as  the  hero  whose 
prowess,  in  the  war  between  themselves  and  Israel,  had  become 
so  celebrated  in  song;  and  in  alarm  he  feigned  himself  mad.^ 
The  half-respect  with  which  madmen  are  regarded  in  the  East 
saved  him  until  he  put  himself  out  of  danger  by  escaping  to  the 
cave  of  Adullam.* 

At  Adullam  there  gathered  round  him,  first  of  all,  his  own 
kindred,  and  then  a  band  of  outlaws  amounting  to  400  men, 
some  being  of  non-Israelite  origin  (/  Sam.  xxvi.  6).  But  the 
insecurity  of  his  position  rendered  him  anxious  for  the  safety 
of  his  parents ;  and  he  therefore  proceeded  to  Moab,  a  country 

*  The  existence  of  the  tabernacle  at  Nob  is  perhaps  questionable.  It  is 
not  improbable  that  it  perished  when  Shiloh  was  destroyed  (see  p.  211), 
especially  in  view  of  the  fact  that  when  David  brought  up  the  Ark  from 
Kiriath  Jearim,  it  was  put,  not  in  the  tabernacle  (the  most  fitting  resting-place, 
if  it  existed),  but  in  a  tent  which  David  pitched  for  it  (^  Sam.  vi.  17). 

"^  David's  reply  to  Ahimelech  that  the  vessels  of  his  young  men  were  holy 
(xxi.  5)  is  probably  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  all  who  were  engaged  on 
a  warlike  mission  (as  David  may  have  pretended  that  he  was)  were  regarded 
as  consecrated;  cf.  *'/;."  xiii.  Z^  Jer.  vi.  4  (marg.). 

^  In  7  Satn.  xxi.  13  for  scrabbled  on  the  doors  the  LXX.  has  irvfAirdvil^ir 
iirl  TuTs  dvpais. 

*  The  city  of  Adullam  was  in  the  Lowland  {Shephelah)  of  Judah,  near  the 
valley  of  Elah  {Josh.  xv.  35),  and  the  cave  was  probably  in  its  neighbourhood. 


230  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

where  he  expected  to  find  an  asylum  for  them  on  account  both 
of  the  hostility  between  Israel  and  Moab  (xiv.  47),  and  of  the 
fact  that  Ruth,  an  ancestress  of  his,  was  a  native  of  the  latter 
country.  The  king  of  Moab  received  them ;  whilst  David  him- 
self took  up  his  quarters  at  Mizpah.  But  by  the  direction  of 
the  prophet  Gad,  he  did  not  stay  there  long,  but  returned  again 
into  the  land  of  Judah,  to  the  forest  of  Hareth  (the  precise 
position  of  which  is  unknown). 

The  hospitality  shown  to  David  by  Ahimelech  at  Nob  brought 
upon  the  latter  and  his  fellow-priests  the  vengeance  of  SauL 
Information  of  David's  reception  there  was  brought  to  Saul,  at 
Gibeah,  by  an  Edomite,^  called  Doeg,  who  had  perhaps  been 
taken  captive  in  the  Edomite  war,  and  was  now  the  chief  of 
Saul's  herdmen.  The  king  accordingly  summoned  the  priests, 
eighty-five, 2  in  all,  before  him;  and  after  charging  them  with 
treason,  directed  their  execution.  The  royal  guards  refused  to 
lay  hands  upon  the  consecrated  priests ;  and  it  was  left  to  the 
foreigner  Doeg  to  carry  out  the  king's  command.  The  city  of 
Nob  was  destroyed  and  all  its  inhabitants  exterminated,  Abiathar, 
one  of  the  sons  of  Ahimelech,  alone  escaping  and  joining  David. 

News  now  reached  David  that  the  Philistines  had  attacked 
Keilah,  a  city  of  Judah  i^Josh.  xv.  44);  and  as  Abiathar  hadi 
brought  with  him  the  ephod  whereby  oracular  responses  were 
obtained,  it  was  at  once  consulted.  David's  followers,  who  had 
already  reason  to  fear  the  hostility  of  their  own  countrymen, 
were  still  more  afraid  of  the  Philistines  \  but  a  renewed  assurance 
of  victory  which  the  oracle  gave,  induced  them  to  make  an 
attempt  to  relieve  the  city,  which  fully  succeeded.  Tidings, 
however,  had  come  to  Saul  that  David  was  at  Keilah,  and  he 
determined  to  besiege  him  there.  The  inhabitants  showed  little 
gratitude  to  David  for  their  recent  deliverance,  and  having  the 
fate  of  Nob  before  their  eyes,  were  prepared  to  surrender  him : 
but  he  was  warned  by  the  priestly  oracle  in  time  (Abiathar 
having  accompanied  David  to  Keilah),  and  left  the  city  before 
Saul  descended  to  attack  it.     Seeking  safety  in  flight,  he  retired 

1  The  LXX.  calls  him  a  Syrian. 

^  The  LXX.,  with  characteristic  exaggeration,  makes  them  305,  and 
Josephus  385. 


THE  RISE  OF  THE  MONARCHY        231 

with  his  followers  (now  amounting  to  600  men)  to  the  wilderness 
which  stretched  from  the  centre  of  Judaea  to  the  Dead  Sea,  and 
different  parts  of  which  received  the  names  of  Ziph  and  Maon. 
Here  he  maintained  himself  and  his  followers  by  protecting  the 
sheep-masters  of  the  neighbourhood  against  the  depredations  of 
the  Amalekites  and  other  Bedouin  tribes,  and  exacting  in  return 
support  for  his  band.  Such  support  many,  no  doubt,  were 
willing  enough  to  give.  It  happened,  however,  that  the  demand 
was  refused  by  a  wealthy  sheep-master,  belonging  to  the  clan  of 
Caleb  and  living  near  Carmel  (in  Judah),  called  Nabal;  and 
David,  incensed  at  his  churlishness,  at  once  meditated  summary 
vengeance.  But  Nabal's  wife,  Abigail,  hearing  what  had  occurred, 
and  being  informed  by  one  of  the  servants  that  David's  claim 
was  not  unreasonable,  went  to  meet  him  without  the  knowledge 
of  her  husband,  and  disarmed  his  hostility  by  an  effective  appeal, 
coupled  with  a  timely  present.  On  her  return  home,  she  found 
her  husband  drinking  himself  drunk,  and  refrained  from  telHng 
him  of  the  danger  to  which  he  had  exposed  himself  until  the 
morning  after  the  debauch.  The  announcement  produced  a 
shock  from  which  he  died  ten  days  afterwards ;  and  David, 
who  had  been  impressed  alike  by  Abigail's  beauty  and  her 
discretion,  married  her.  Another  wife  whom  he  espoused  about 
this  time  was  Ahinoam  of  Jezreel  (a  place  in  Judah, /os/z.  xv.  56),  - -. 
Michal  the  daughter  of  Saul  having  been  taken  from  him  and  / 
given  to  a  certain  Paltiel  (or  Palti). 

But  in  his  desert  retreat  he  was  not  long  left  unmolested  by- — ^ 
the  king.      Information   of  his  whereabouts   was  sent   to  Saul    / 
by  some  of  the  natives  of  the  district,  and  he  at  once  went  in  / 
pursuit  of  him.      In  the  course  of  the  pursuit,  Saul's  life  on 
one  or  two  occasions  was  at  David's  mercy;   but  the  fugitive 
magnanimously  refrained  from  taking  the  advantage  offered  him, 
and  a  temporary  reconciliation  was,  in  consequence,  effected  be- 
tween them. 

Of  David's  meeting  with  Saul  whilst  a  wanderer  in  the  wilderness  of 
Judoea,  and  his  generous  conduct  in  sparing  the  life  of  his  enemy,  there  are 
apparently  two  accounts,  one  contained  in  xxiii.  19-xxiv.  22,  the  other  in 
xxvi.  1-25  :  cf.  xxiii.  19  (the  speech  of  the  Ziphites)  with  xxvi.  I  ;  xxiii.  23 
{0/  a  certainty)  with  xxvi.  4 ;  xxiv.  2  (3,000  men)  with  xxvi.  2  ;  xxiv.  4  (the 
suggestions  made  by  David's  followers)  with  xxvi.  8;  xxiv.  14  {a  Jlea)  with 


232  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

xxvi.  20;^  xxiv.  i6  (Saul's  address  to  David)  with  xxvi.  17.  One  of  these 
narratives  which  is  preceded  by  a  brief  account  (xxiii.  16-18)  of  an  interview 
between  David  and  Jonathan,  in  which  the  latter  encouraged  the  fugitive, 
represents  David  as  hiding  first  in  the  hill  of  Hachilah,^  and  then  proceeding 
to  the  wilderness  of  Maon,  whither  Saul  pursued  him.  Withdrawn  for  a  while 
from  the  pursuit  by  a  raid  of  the  PhiUstines,  Saul  returned  and  learnt  that 
David  was  at  Engedi  (on  the  west  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea),  where  he  had 
concealed  himself  in  a  cave.  Saul  chanced  to  enter  the  cave,  ignorant  of 
David's  presence ;  and  in  the  obscurity,  the  latter  was  enabled  to  approach 
sufficiently  near  the  king  to  cut  off  the  skirt  of  his  robe,  but  resisted  the 
suggestion  of  his  followers  that  they  should  take  Saul's  life.  After  the  king 
left  the  cave,  David  followed  and  discovered  himself  to  him,  earnestly  depre- 
cating Saul's  animosity  towards  him.  The  king  acknowledged  David's  mag- 
nanimity in  sparing  his  life  when  it  was  at  his  mercy ;  and  before  parting 
from  him  made  him  swear  that  he  would  not  destroy  his  persecutor's  offspring. 
According  to  the  other  narrative,  the  encounter  took  place  near  Hachilah.' 
Dav4d  approached  Saul's  camp  at  night  and  got  inside  the  lines,  in  company 
with  one  of  his  followers,  and  reached  the  sleeping  king.  His  comrade 
(Abishai,  the  son  of  his  sister  Zeruiah)  was  eager  to  take  the  opportunity  of* 
assassinating  the  monarch  with  his  own  spear,  which  was  stuck  in  the  ground 
at  his  head ;  but  David  restrained  him,  and  confined  himself  to  carrying 
off  the  spear  and  a  cruse  of  water  placed  near  Saul.  Then  withdrawing  to 
the  top  of  a  neighbouring  hill,  he  shouted*  and  awoke  the  guards,  taunting 
their  captain  with  sleeping  at  his  post ;  and  being  recognised  by  the  king, 
remonstrated  with  him  for  his  pursuit  of  him.  Saul  confessed  his  error,  and 
bade  David  return  to  him  ;  but  David,  ignoring  the  invitation,  contented 
himself  with  bidding  the  king  send  someone  to  recover  his  spear.  If  the 
view  be  correct  that  they  are  duplicate  versions  of  the  same  incident,  the 
second  is  the  more  plausible ;  and  xxvi.  17  suits  its  context  better  than 
xxiv.  16. 

But  in  spite  of  Saul's  expression  of  repentance,  David  prudently 
declined  to  put  himself  into  the  king's  power  by  returning  home. 
On  the  contrary,  the  treachery  of  the  Ziphites  made  it  clear  that 
the  border-land  was  no  longer  safe  for  him;  and  he  therefore 
once  more  determined  to  seek  protection  with  the  PhiUstines. 
His  circumstances  now  were  very  different  from  what  they  had 
been  on  the  occasion  of  his  former  flight  to  Gath.  Instead  of 
being  a  solitary  fugitive,  he  was  at  the  head  of  a  body  of  600 
men.  The  relations  between  him  and  Saul  could  have  been  no 
secret  to  any  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Philistine  cities ;  and  now 
that  his  fideHty  seemed  guaranteed  by  his  fear  of  the  Israelite 
king,  the  memory  of  his  former  triumphs  over  themselves  would 
only  make  the  Philistines  set  a  higher  value  upon  his  services. 

^  But  the  LXX.  here,  for  a  flea,  reads  my  life. 

*  Described  in  xxiii.  19  (marg.)  as  south  of  Jeshimon. 

'  Described  in  xxvi.  i  (marg.)  as  be/ore  {i.e.  east  of)  Jeshimon. 

*  Cf.  Jud.  ix.  7. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        233 

He  was  therefore  welcomed  by  Achish  the  king  of  Gathj  but 
at  his  own  request  was  not  detained  at  Gath  itself,  but  had  the 
city  of  Ziklagi  assigned  to  him  as  a  place  of  residence  both  for 
himself  and  his  men :  and  there  he  appears  to  have  been  rein- 
forced by  fresh  forces  drawn  not  only  from  Judah,  but  also  from 
Benjamin,  Manasseh,  and  Gad  (see  i  Ch.  xii.  1-22).     In  thus 
obtaining  for  himself  a  home  at  a  distance  from  the  court  of 
Achish,  David  was  enabled  to  pursue  without  remark  a  policy 
of  duplicity.     Pretending  to  attack,  in  the  service  of  his  adopted 
country,  the  land  of  his  birth,  he,  in  reality,  turned  his  arms 
against  the  Amalekites,  the  Geshurites^  and  the  Gizrites,^  tribes       y 
that   occupied  the  region   between  Telaim  and  the  border   of     / 
Egypt.     By  ruthlessly  slaying  the  whole  population  indiscrimi-   / 
nately,  and   sparing  neither  sex  nor  age,   he  prevented  all  in-     ^  , 
formation  of  the  truth  from  reaching  Achish ;  and  thus  was  able     / 
to  convince  the  Philistines  of  the  impossibility  of  any  subsequent     \ 
reconciliation  with  his  countrymen,  whilst  at  the  same  time  sub-       ) 
stantially  benefiting  the  latter  by  prosecuting  an  exterminating  war  /^ 
with  peoples  whose  raids  were  a  continual  source  of  annoyance. 

Samuel,  by  this  time,  had  passed  away»  and  was  buried  in  his  — 
native  city  of  Ramah  (/  Sa7n.  xxviii.  3;  cf.  xxv.  i).     Too  little  J 
information  is  furnished  about  his  life  and  character  for  these  to     j 
be  appraised  at  length ;  and  even  his  public  services  can  only  be 
estimated  in  general  terms.     As  has  been  seen  from  the  com- 
parison already  instituted  between  the  various  passages  relating 
to  him,  the  actual  position  and  authority  enjoyed  by  him  seem 
to  have  been  magnified  in  one  of  the  historical  sources  upon 
which  the  writer  of  /  Samuel  draws ;  and  it  appears  certain  that 
the  extensive  successes  over  the  Philistines  which  are  represented 
as  achieved  by  Israel  in  his  days,  and  under  his  auspices,  can 
have  had  little  existence  in  fact.     But  it  seems  equally  certain 
that  it  was  largely  owing  to  his  acute  apprehension  of  his  country's 
needs,  and  his  ability  and  promptitude  in  taking  steps  to  meet 
them,  that  the  ultimate  triumph  of  Israel  over  its  enemies  was 

*  In  Josh.  XV.  31  and  xix.  5  allotted  diversely  to  Tudah  and  Simeon. 

"^  For  Geshurites  in  this  district  cf.  Josh.  xiii.  2.  But  the  LXX.  omits  the 
word,  which  may  be  merely  a  corruption  of  the  following  name. 

^  Or  Gizrites^  i.e.  the  inhabitants  of  Gezer,  which  remained  in  the  hands 
of  the  native  poi:»ulation  until  the  time  of  Solomon  {i  Kg.  ix.  16). 


234  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

due.  He  perceived  that  the  institution  of  monarchy  was  esseotiaL 
to  weld  Israel  into  a  nation,  and  give  it  cohesion  and  confidence 
in  the  face  of  its  assailants;  and  though  he  was  not  altogether^ 
fortunate  in  the  person  he  chose  to  be  the  first  king,  his  belief 
in  the  kingship  was  thoroughly  justified.  And  his  insight  into 
character  was,  in  truth,  Httle  inferior  to  his  statesmanship;  for 
if  his  choice  of  Saul  was  not  quite  happy,  his  later  selection  of 
David  was  most  judicious.  Samuel  may,  in  consequence,  be  justly 
regarded  as  having,  in  a  large  measure,  influenced  the  fortunes 
and  moulded  the  destinies  of  Israel  during  the  subsequent 
centuries ;  and  the  place  he  fills  in  the  pages  of  the  history  that 
bears  his  name  does  not  exaggerate  his  real  importance. 

After  Samuel's  death  no  prophet  arose  in  his  room  to  aid  the 
counsels  of  the  king.  The  Philistines  were  now  making  prepara- 
tions for  another  invasion  of  Israel,  weakened  as  it  was  by  the 
withdrawal  of  David  and  a  number  of  its  best  fighting-men, 
The  successes  gained  by  Saul  in  the  earlier  part  of  his  reign  had 
enabled  him  to  secure  the  passes  which  led  from  the  Lowland 
directly  into  Benjamin  and  Ephraim.  The  direction  of  the 
present  Philistine  advance  was  consequently  along  the  vale  of 
Sharon,  through  the  pass  of  Megiddo,  into  the  valley  of  Esdrae- 
lon  (where  the  invaders  may  have  had  sympathisers  among  the 
Canaanite  cities,  see  p.  185),  the  object  being  to  obtain  command 
of  the  great  high  road  from  the  East  (as  appears  from  the  capture 
of  Bethshan),  and  to  threaten  the  centre  of  the  kingdom  from  the 
north.  The  host  mustered  at  Aphek,^  and  David  was  called 
upon  by  Achish  to  accompany  him.  He  gave  him  an  ambiguous 
answer  (xxviii.  2) ;  but  being  appointed  commander  of  the  royal 
body-guard,  proceeded  to  the  rendezvous  with  him,  where  he  was 
joined  by  certain  Manassites  {i  Ch.  xii.  19).  The  other  Philistine 
princes,  however,  distrusted  the  Hebrew  soldier,  and  protested 
against  his  being  allowed  to  march  against  his  countrymen,  lest 
he  should  reconcile  himself  to  his  king  by  changing  sides  in  the 
coming  battle.  Achish  had  unwillingly  to  yield ;  and  with  many 
professions    of   goodwill,    dismissed    David,    who    returned    to 

^  Identified  by  some  with  the  Aphek  oi  Josh.  xii.  18  (which  was  probably 
in  the  plain  of  Sharon).  Others  place  it  in  Esdraelon;  but  this  must  have 
been  more  than  three  days'  march  from  Ziklag  (/  Sam.  xxx.  i).  The  Apheks 
of  /  Sam.  iv.  ly/osh.  xiii.  4  (xix.  30),  and  /  Kg.  xx,  26  are  all  distinct. 


THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        235 

Philistia.  Meantime  Saul,  along  the  hills,  had  followed  the 
Philistines  in  the  maritime  plain;  and  took  up  a  position,  first 
at  the  fountain  in  Jezreel  (perhaps  the  spring  of  Harod),  to  guard 
the  pass  of  Dothan  leading  into  Ephraim,  and  then  on  mount 
Gilboa  (at  the  S.E.  corner  of  the  plain  of  Esdraelon),  where  he 
awaited  attack. 

The  death  of  Samuel  and  the  absence  of  the  priest  Abiathar,  who  had 
joined  David,  left  Saul  destitute  of  the  ordinary  means  of  enquiring  of 
Jehovah ;  and  in  his  anxiety  about  the  issue  of  the  coming  engagement, 
he  is  related  to  have  had  recourse  to  a  woman  of  the  Canaanite  town  of 
Endor  who  claimed  to  have  a  familiar  spirit,^  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  he  had 
previously  expelled  all  such  from  the  land  of  Israel.  He  visited  her  in 
disguise  (the  Philistine  camp  being  between  him  and  the  town  of  Endor),  and 
after  reassuring  her  (for  she  feared  that,  when  he  bade  her  bring  up  whom- 
soever he  named,  he  was  seeking  to  entrap  her)  he  directed  her  to  summon 
Samuel.  It  is  said  that  Samuel  appeared ;  and  the  relations  which  had 
existed  between  Samuel  and  Saul  led  the  woman  to  infer  that  her  visitor  was 
the  king.  To  Saul's  enquiry  what  he  was  to  do,  the  dead  prophet  declared 
that  Jehovah  had  become  his  adversary,  and  announced  that  on  the  morrow 
the  king  and  his  sons  should  be  with  him,  and  that  Israel  should  be  delivered 
into  the  hands  of  the  Philistines. 

The  episode  is  narrated  in  a  section  (c.  xxviii. )  which  does  not  fit  accurately 
into  its  present  context.  In  xxix.  i  the  Israehtes  are  at  Jezreel,  towards  which 
place  the  Philistines  advance  from  Aphek  (ver.  i,  ii),  the  forces  of  Israel  pre- 
sumably retiring,  in  consequence,  to  Gilboa,  the  scene  of  the  subsequent 
battle  ;  whereas  in  xxviii.  4  they  are  represented  as  already  at  Gilboa.  The 
allusions  in  xxviii.  17-18  to  c.  xv.  suggest  that,  in  the  original  sources  from  I 
which  the  history  is  derived,  it  stood  in  some  relation  to  the  latter  narrative.      " 

The  next  day  the  Philistines  attacked,  and  the  battle  went 
against  Israel.  The  three  eldest  sons  of  Saul  fell;  and  their 
father,  unwilling  to  survive  the  loss  of  his  children,  his  army,  and 
his  honour,  bade  his  armour-bearer  thrusthim  through,  and  when 
the  latter  refused,  he  fell  upon  his  own  sword.  The  result  of 
the  engagement  placed  the  valley  of  Esdraelon  at  the  mercy 
of  the  enemy,  and  cut  off  the  whole  of  the  region  to  the  north 
of  it.  On  the  walls  of  one  of  the  towns  that  passed  into  their 
hanQs,  the  Canaanite  Bethshan  near  the  Jordan  ^Jud.  i.  27),  the 
body  of  the  dead  king  was  hung;  whilst  his  head  was  fastened 

*  A  familiar  spirit  is  generally  supposed  to  have  been  a  spiritual  agency 
believed  to  animate  the  person  who  claimed  to  possess  it  (cf.  Lev.  xx.  27 
Ileb.);  but  some  have  thought  (from  the  terms  used  in  2  Kg.  xxi.  6,  marg.) 
that  it  was  a  material  object.  The  LXX.  renders  it  by  iyyaarpl/jLvdos,  and 
one  of  the  devices  employed  in  connection  with  it  was  doubtless  ventriloquism, 
the  famihar  spirit  appearing  to  speak  from  the  ground  [Is.  xxix.  4)  as  from 
the  world  of  the  dead  (cf.  p.  89.). 


236  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

in  the  temple  of  Dagon  (/  Ch.  x.  lo),  and  his  arms  placed  as  a 
trophy  in  the  temples  of  the  Ashtaroth.  The  panic  inspired  by 
the  success  of  the  invaders  extended  even  to  the  opposite  bank 
of  the  Jordan.  The  cities  were  abandoned  by  their  inhabitants, 
who  took  to  flight,  and  the  enemy  at  once  proceeded  to  occupy 
them.  It  is  probable,  however,  that  the  Philistines  did  not 
succeed  in  establishing  themselves  in  Gilead;  for  not  only  was 
the  town  of  Jabesh  untouched,  but  Mahanaim,  on  the  death  of 
Saul,  became  the  capital  of  his  son  Eshbaal. 

The  body  of  Saul  did  not  long  remain  exposed  on  the  walls  of 
Bethshan.  The  citizens  of  Jabesh,  in  gratitude  for  the  service 
done  to  them  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  went  by  night  and 
removed  it,  and  bringing  it  to  Jabesh,  burnt  it  there.  The 
bones  were  afterwards  buried  in  the  neighbourhood ;  whence  at 
a  later  period  they  were  removed  to  the  family  tomb  at  Zelah 
{2  Sam.  xxi.  14). 

The  length  of  Saul's  reign  is  uncertain.  The  only  passage  in 
the  O.T.  which  affords  information  on  the  point  (xiii.  i)  states 
that  he  reigned  two  years,  which  is  far  too  short  a  period 
for  the  events  recorded  to  have  taken  place  in  it;  and  the 
verse  (which  is  omitted  by  the  LXX.)  is  clearly  defective.  In 
Acts  xiii.  21  his  reign  is  reckoned  at  40  years.  Of  his  children, 
tliree  sons,  Jonathan,  Abinadab,  and  Melchi-shua,  perished  with 
their  father  at  Gilboa.  A  fourth,  Eshbaal  or  Ish-bosheth,  who  is 
probably  identical  with  the  Ish\-i  named  in  i  Sam.  xiv.  49, 
succeeded  to  a  part  of  his  father's  dominions.  Two  others  are 
alluded  to  in  2  Sam.  xxi.  8 ;  and  he  had  at  least  two  daughters, 
Merab  and  MichaL 

Saul's  achievements,  and  possibly  his  character,  have  suffered 
at  the  hands  of  the  writer  of  i  Samuel^  whose  interest  centred 
chiefly  in  David.  Of  his  public  career  little  is  really  known ; 
for  with  the  exception  of  the  campaigns  with  which  his  reign 
opened  and  closed,  the  record  is  mainly  concerned  with  his 
unhappy  animosity  towards  David.  Of  the  chapters  dealing  with 
his  wars,  those  which  are  fullest  of  detail  show  him  to  have  been 
a  capable  and  gallant,  though  not  always  a  fortunate,  soldier :  but 
there  are  not  lacking  indications  elsewhere  which  prove  him  to 
have   possessed   many   kingly   qualities   as   well  as  tbose_jndre 


es 

THE   RISE   OF  THE   MONARCHY        237 

"necially  characteristic  of  the  warrior.  It  is  clear  that  he  must 
have  re^iinifed~To^the  rest  of  Israel  the  tribe  of  Judah,  which,  all 
throagh:  the  period  of  the  Judges,  had  been  more  or  less  severed 
fronrits  fellow-tribes  :  for  not  only  did  his  rule  embrace  Bethlehem, 
the  Jiome  of  David  (xvi.  19),  but  the  campaign  against  the 
Amalekites  (xiv.  48)  was  manifestly  intended  to  protect  the 
southern  frontier  of  Judah.  It  was  probably  to  amalgamate  the 
-southern  tribe  more  closely  with  the  rest  of  his  subjects  that  he 
destroyed  the  Gibeonites,  in  spite  of  the  ancient  covenant 
between  them  and  Israel,  an  act  for  which  atonement  had  subse- 
quently to  be  made  {2  Sam.  xxi.  1-14).  In  the  course  of 
extending  his  kingdom  towards  the  south  he  appears  to  have 
engaged  in  hostilities  with  Edom,  and  was  thus  perhaps  the  first 
to  make  an  effort  to  bring  Israel  into  contact  with  the  Red  Sea 
littoral.  East  of  Jordan,  his  early  attack  upon  Nahash  the 
Ammonite  was  followed  by  a  war  with  Moab ;  and  his  authority 
was  so  firmly  secured  over  Gilead  that  Mahanaim  became  the 
refuge  and  capital  of  his  son  Eshbaal  {2  Sam.  ii.  8).  He  even 
pushed  his  arms  as  far  north  as  the  territory  of  Zobah.  In  the 
internal  politics  of  his  kingdom,  the  fact  that  he  lost  the  confidence 
of  Samuel,  who  had  first  designated  him  for  the  throne,  must  be 
counted  against  him ;  for  at  this  period,  as  at  others,  the  prophetic  / 
order  was  a  most  powerful  factor  making  for  the  unity,  security,  ' 
and  moral  well-being  of  Israel.  But  though  he  broke  with  the 
prophets,  he  appears  to  have  been  scrupulous  in  the  observance 
of  the  externals  of  religion  (see  xiv.  34-35,  xxviii.  9).  His  private 
life  was  marked  by  simplicity ;  and  his  elevation  to  the  throne 
was  not  followed  by  the  adoption  of  the  luxurious  habits  common 
among  Eastern  sovereigns.  His  character,  no  doubt,  deteriorated 
under  the  influence  of  jealousy ;  and  at  times  he  was  betrayed  by 
his  passion  into  acts  of  merciless  savagery  (xix.  10  foil,  xxii.  17 
foil.).  But  the  vindictiveness  which  he  displayed  in  later  life, 
which  was   perhaps   not   wholly  unnatural  under  any  circum- 

stances,  was  probably  in  part  the  result  of  mental  disease.     And 

without  any  stress  being  laid  upon  the  language  of  David's 
panegyric  (2  Sam.  i.  23),  it  is  plain  from  the  conduct  of  the  men 
of  Jabesh  Gilead  after  Gilboa,  that  he  retained  the  gratitude  of 
those  whom  he  had  first  served ;  and  in  spite  of  his  misfortunes, 


238  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY  ^g 

he  was  able  to  transmit  a  large  part  of  his  authority  to  h 
son  Eshbaal.  On  the  whole,  Saul  seems  to  have  been  lauier 
hardly  treated  by  his  historian.  He  accomplished  more  for  his 
country  than  he  has  generally  received  credit  for;  and  though 
his  reign  can  scarcely  be  pronounced  a  successful  one,  he 
undoubtedly  in  some  measure  prepared  the  way  for  the  success 
achieved  by  David. 

Yet  it  must  be  confessed  that  Saul  was  himself  largely  re- 
sponsible for  the  ruin  of  his  career.  He  failed  to  make  the  most 
of  his  opportunities.  It  was  a  period  when  Israel,  recovered 
from  the  strain  and  exhaustion  of  the  Conquest,  and  having 
secured  practical  supremacy  over  the  Canaanites  in  whose  country 
it  had  established  itself,  was  beginning  to  recognise  its  own 
strength  and  was  prepared  to  make  a  combined  stand  against  the 
inroads  of  the  Philistine  immigrants.  Of  this  national  upheaval 
the  numerous  prophets,  who  now  made  their  appearance  in 
companies,  were  at  once  a  cause  and  a  symptom.  Fired  them- 
selves with  religious  enthusiasm  amounting  even  to  frenzy,  they 
were  calculated  to  fan  throughout  the  land  the  flame  of  patriotism, 
and  to  encourage  their  people  to  struggle  desperately  for  the  sake 
of  their  country  and  their  God.  Had  Saul  known  how  to  avail 
nimself  of  all  the  fervour  and  moral  force  which  were  thus 
generated,  the  issue,  both  for  himself  and  his  house,  might  have 
been  far  other  than  what  it  proved  to  be.  As  it  was,  he  was  out 
of  touch  with  the  prophetic  movement ;  and  though  it  is  impossible 
to  trace  with  certainty  the  circumstances  which  produced  the 
alienation,  it  is  clear  that  a  breach  finally  occurred  between  him 
and  Samuel,  the  leader  of  the  prophets.  Stubborn  of  disposition, 
narrow  in  his  sympathies,  and  lacking  a  statesmanlike  grasp  of 
the  situation,  he  refused  to  the  prophet  the  submission  which 
the  latter,  as  the  representative  of  Jehovah,  demanded ;  and  so 
threw  away  what  should  have  been  his  greatest  source  of  con-, 
fidence  and  therefore  of  strength.  The  tide  that  is  in  the  affairs 
of  men  Saul  took  at  the  flood,  and  it  bore  him  on  to  fortune; 
but  eventually,  in  place  of  guiding  his  bark  dexterously  along 
the  stream,  he  obstinately  set  it  athwart  the  current,  and  so  made 
shipwreck.  His  rival  and  successor  pursued  a  very  different 
course,  and  reached,  in  consequence,  a  very  different  result. 


CHAPTER  IX 
THE  REIGN  OF  DAVID 

Sources — i  Sam.  xxx.,  2  Sam.  i.  i-z  Kg.  ii.  11,  7  Ch.  xi.-xxix. 

AT  the  battle  of  Gilboa,  David  (as  has  been  related)  was  not 
JL\^  present.  After  his  dismissal  by  Achish  at  the  instance  of 
the  Philistine  chiefs,  he  returned  to  Ziklag,  only  to  find  it  de- 
stroyed. A  body  of  Amalekites  had  made  a  raid  upon  the 
southern  frontier  of  the  Philistine  Cherethites,  the  Calibbites, 
and  the  people  of  Judah,  had  attacked  Ziklag,  taken  captive  its 
inhabitants  (including  David's  wives),  and  set  fire  to  the  place. 
David's  followers,  on  discovering  that  their  homes  were  ruined, 
vented  their  rage  upon  their  leader,  whom  they  talked  of  stoning. 
The  latter,  on  consulting  the  priestly  oracle  in  the  hands  of 
Abiathar,  was  told  that  if  he  pursued  the  enemy  he  would  over- 
take them  and  recover  the  spoil ;  and  accordingly  he  at  once  set 
out,  his  march  being  so  rapid  that  200  out  of  his  600  men  had  to 
be  left  behind  at  the  brook  of  Besor.^  An  Egyptian  servant 
belonging  to  one  of  the  Amalekites,  who  had  been  abandoned 
by  his  master  because  he  was  sick,  was  found,  and  undertook  to 
guide  David  to  the  band  he  sought.  He  fulfilled  his  word ;  and 
the  Israelites  were  enabled  to  surprise  the  enemy  in  the  midst  of 
a  feast.  The  Amalekites  were  almost  completely  destroyed,  400 
alone  escaping.  David,  m  spite  of  the  protests  of  certain  of  his 
followers,  insisted  upon  dividing  the  spoil  fairly  between  those 
who  had  taken  part  in  the  battle  and  those  who  had  been  left 
behind  at  Besor ;  and  his  ruling  became  a  recognised  practice  in 
later  times.^  He  likewise  sent  a  portion  of  the  booty  as  a 
present  to  the  leading  men  amongst  the  Judaeans,  the  Kenites, 

*  Not  identified.  *  Cf.  Num.  xxxi.  27,  and  see  p.  129. 

239 


240  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  the  Jerahmeelites,  with  a  view,  no  doubt,  of  securing  their 
sympathy  and  support  when  he  should  attempt  to  succeed  to 
the  throne  at  Saul's  death.  His  designs  in  this  direction  must 
also  have  been  aided  by  his  marriage  with  Abigail  and  Ahinoam, 
both  of  whom  belonged  to  Judah  (/  Sam.  xxv.  40-43). 

It  was  two  days  after  David's  return  to  Ziklag  from  the  over- 
throw of  the  band  which  had  raided  it  that  information  of  the 
defeat  at  Gilboa  first  reached  him.  It  was  brought  by  an 
Amalekite  sojourner,  who  had  been  on  the  battle-field,  and,  antici- 
pating the  Philistines,  had  despoiled  the  dead  Saul  of  his  crown 
and  bracelets,  and  now  offered  them  to  his  rival  in  hope  of  re- 
ward. But  claiming  (seemingly  falsely)  to  have  killed  the  king 
while  still  unwounded,  in  answer  to  a  despairing  appeal  from  him, 
he  received,  as  his  only  recompense,  immediate  execution  for 
having,  on  his  own  testimony,  raised  his  hand  against  Jehovah's 
anointed.  In  memory  of  Saul  and  his  son  Jonathan  David  com- 
posed an  elegy,  which,  from  an  expression  occurring  in  it,  after- 
wards came  to  be  known  as  the  "Song  of  the  Bow."i 

The  success  of  the  Philistines  at  Gilboa  destroyed  for  a  time 
Israel's  recently  acquired  unity.  Tribal  feeling  was  still  suffi- 
ciently strong  to  lead  Judah  to  act  independently  of  the  rest 
of  the  nation ;  and  when  David,  by  the  direction  of  the  priestly 
oracle  (of  which  Abiathar  had  charge),  advanced  with  all  his  com- 
pany to  Hebron,  he  reaped  the  fruit  of  his  judicious  courtesies 
and  prudent  marriage-alliances,  and  was,  without  opposition, 
anointed  king  over  the  tribe.  But  the  fact  that  during  his  rule  at 
Hebron  David  was  unmolested  by  the  PhiHstines  suggests  that 
his  previous  relations  with  them  were  unaltered,  and  that  he  was, 
at  first,  a  feudatory  of  Philistia.  One  of  his  earUest  acts  was  to 
thank  the  citizens  of  Jabesh  Gilead  for  their  devotion  in  rescuing 
Saul's  body  from  the  walls  of  Bethshan,  whilst  at  the  same  time 
he  announced  to  them  his  own  elevation. 

On  the  E.  of  Jordan  another  kingdom  was  established. 
Thither,  as  has  been  said,  many  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
western   side   of  the   river,   including,  doubtless,  most  of  the 

1  Ct  the  elegy  on  Abner,  2  Sam.  iii  33-34.  The  description  "  Song  of 
the  Bow  "  is  an  explanation  rather  than  a  translation  of  the  original,  for  the 
Heb.  only  has  bow,  which  the  LXX.  omits  altogether. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  241 

survivors  of  Saul's  army,  had  fled  for  refuge ;  and  at  Mahanaim 
EshbaaU  (or  Ishbosheth)^,  one  of  Saul's  children,  and  perhaps 
the  only  surviving  legitimate  son,  was  made  king  by  Abner,  Saul's 
cousin 3  and  commander-in-chief.  The  relations  of  Eshbaal  to 
the  Philistines  are  less  easy  to  determine  than  those  of  David. 
On  the  one  hand,  it  has  been  held  that  he,  like  his  rival,  was  a 
vassal  of  Phihstia,  and  maintained  his  court  at  Mahanaim  on 
sufferance.  But  in  the  absence  of  definite  information,  it  seems 
equally  probable  that,  during  his  reign  of  seven  years,*  he  and 
Abner  were  engaged  in  a  protracted  and  not  unsuccessful  war 
with  the  oppressors  of  their  country.  If  so,  it  may  be  presumed 
that  of  the  districts  described  as  subject  to  Eshbaal,  namely, 
Gilead,  Jezreel  {i,e.  the  plain  of  Esdraelon),  Ephraim,  Benjamin, 
and  perhaps  Asher,^  those  on  the  west  of  Jordan  were  re- 
conquered in  detail.  As  soon  as  the  bulk  of  the  country  was 
once  more  recovered,  Abner  turned  his  attention  to  the  Philis- 
tines' vassal-state  of  Judah,  and  with  an  army  advanced  upon 
Gibeon.  Near  a  pool  in  the  neighbourhood  he  was  met  by 
Joab,  the  nephew  of  David ^  and  commander  of  his  forces. 
Whilst  the  hosts  were  confronting  one  another,  Abner  proposed 
a  combat,  or  tournament,  of  twelve  champions  from  each  army, 

^  I  Ch.  viii.  33.  If  the  order  given  here  is  correct,  he  was  probably  the 
youngest  of  Saul's  sons,  and  because  of  his  youth,  was  absent  from  the  battle 
of  Gilboa.  His  age  in  2  Sam.  ii.  10  is  given  as  forty,  but  this  must  be  an  error. 
The  language  of  ver.  8  confirms  the  belief  that  he  was  under  age.  He  is 
perhaps  identical  with  the  Ishvi  of  /  Sam.  xiv.  49. 

"^  The  alteration  to  Ishbosheth  is  probably  intentional,  the  word  bosheth 
"shame"  being  substituted  for  the  name  of  the  heathen  deity  Baal.  But  at 
this  period  Baal  appears  to  have  been  a  title  of  Jehovah  (cf.  p.  279). 

'  So  stated  in  /  Sajn.  xiv.  50,  but  according  to  /  Ch.  viii.  33  Abner  was 
Saul's  uncle. 

*  2  Sam.  ii.  10  states  that  he  reigned  two  years ;  but  David  reigned  more 
than  seven  years  at  Hebron  (v.  5),  and  it  is  difficult  to  suppose  that  five  years 
elapsed  between  Eshbaal's  death  and  David's  accession  to  the  throne  of  all  Israel. 

*  The  Heb.  of  2  Sajn.  ii.  9  has  Ashurites^  which  ought  to  be  the  same  as 
the  Asshurim  of  Gen.  xxv.  3.  But  these  were  presumably  Arabian  tribes, 
and  therefore  remote  from  the  borders  of  Eshbaal's  kingdom.  The  Vulgate 
and  Syriac  have  Geshiirites ;  but  the  Geshurites  N.  of  Bashan  {Dent.  iii.  14, 
Josh.  xii.  5)  were  independent  during  David's  reign  {2  Sam.  xiii.  37),  and 
those  on  the  S.  of  Philistia  {Josh.  xiii.  2,  i  Sam.  xxvii.  8)  would  be  no  more 
coterminous  with  Eshbaal's  territory  than  the  Asshurim.  The  Targum  has 
Asheriies. 

*  Joab's  mother  Zeruiah  was  sister  or  half-sister  of  David,  /  Ch.  ii.  16. 


242  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

a  proposition  which  was  accepted  by  Joab.  The  fight  between 
them  was  so  fierce  that  they  were  all  slain  ;  and  there  then  ensued 
a  general  engagement  in  which  Abner's  forces  were  defeated,  the 
place  receiving  in  consequence  the  name  of  Helkath  Hazzurim 
("the  field  of  the  sharp  knives"^).  In  the  subsequent  rout, 
Abner  himself  was  followed  closely  by  Asahel  the  brother  of 
Joab ;  whom,  in  order  to  avoid  a  feud  with  Joab,  he  first  vainly 
tried  to  dissuade  from  pursuing  him,  and  then  endeavoured  to 
disable  only,  but  unfortunately  slew.  Eventually,  on  an  appeal 
from  Abner,  Joab  drew  off  his  forces ;  and  the  former  re-crossed 
the  Jordan,  and  passing  through  Bithron,^  returned  to  Mahanaim. 
Joab's  loss  amounted  to  only  twenty  men  (including  his  brother 
Asahel),  whereas  of  the  forces  of  Abner  360  perished.  This  was 
the  beginning  of  a  long  war  between  Eshbaal  and  David,  in 
which  fortune  leaned  to  the  side  of  the  latter;  but  no  further 
particulars  have  been  preserved. 

The  end  came  when  Abner,  growing  presumptuous,  provoked 
Eshbaal's  resentment  by  trespassing  upon  his  sovereign's  rights. 
A  connection  formed  by  Abner  with  Rizpah,  a  concubine  of 
Saul's,  was  interpreted  by  Eshbaal,  in  accordance  with  the  ideas 
of  the  time,  as  indicating  an  attempt  upon  the  throne ;  ^  and  he 
accordingly  called  Abner  to  account.  The  latter,  hotly  indignant, 
reproached  his  sovereign  with  ingratitude,  and  swore  that  he 
would  translate  the  kingdom  to  David.  He  was  as  good  as  his 
word.  Disaffection  had  already  begun  to  prevail  in  consequence 
of  the  unfavourable  contrast  which  Eshbaal  (it  may  be  presumed) 
presented  to  the  king  of  Judah,  and  the  ill-success  which,  in  the 
struggle  between  them,  had  followed  his  arms;  and  this  Abner 
now  proceeded  to  bring  to  a  head,  by  advocating  an  immediate 
transference  of  allegiance,  his  intrigues  extending  even  to  Esh- 
baal's own  tribe  of  Benjamin.  At  the  same  time  he  made  over- 
tures to  David  which  the  latter  showed  himself  willing  to  entertain, 
but  laid  down  as  a  condition  the  restoration  of  his  former  wife 
Michal,  the  daughter  of  Saul — probably  in  order  to  give  himself 
a  stronger  claim  in  the  eyes  of  those  who,  disgusted  with  Esh- 

^  The  LXX.  renders  it  by  \ixph  rtav  iiri^oCXuiv,  implying,  in  the  case  of  the 
last  word,  a  different  original. 

2  Perhaps  a  gorge  leading  from  the  Jordan  valley  up  its  eastern  flank. 
»  Ct  2  Sam.  xii.  8,  xvi.  21,  22. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  243 

baal's  incapacity,  still  entertained  feelings  of  loyalty  to  Saul's 
house.  Consequently,  a  formal  demand  was  made  to  Eshbaal  for 
her  return;  and  the  king,  unable  to  refuse,  sent  and  took  her 
from  her  husband  Paltiel  and  delivered  her  to  David's  envoys. 
These  preliminary  negotiations  having  been  brought  to  a  close, 
Abner,  with  a  small  retinue,  went  to  David  at  Hebron  and 
arranged  to  bring  about  a  union  of  the  two  kingdoms.  Joab,  who 
had  been  absent  on  a  foray  whilst  David  was  conferring  with 
Abner,  returned  shortly  after  the  latter's  departure ;  and  on  hear- 
ing that  he  had  been  allowed  to  leave  in  safety,  angrily  remon- 
strated with  David,  representing  that  Abner  had  come  to  Hebron 
merely  for  the  purpose  of  espial,  and  perhaps  tacitly  rebuking  the 
king  for  not  prosecuting,  when  the  opportunity  came,  the  blood 
feud,  in  which  his  relationship  to  Zeruiah  the  mother  of  Asahel, 
might  be  thought  to  involve  him.  On  retiring  from  David's 
presence,  he  despatched  messengers,  without  the  king's  knowledge, 
to  recall  Abner ;  and  when  the  latter  arrived,  he  quietly  took  him 
aside  and,  with  the  help  of  his  brother  Abishai,  assassinated  him 
in  revenge  for  Asahel's  death.  David,  on  hearing  of  the  murder, 
loudly  asserted  his  own  innocence  (which,  as  he  was  the  gainer  by 
the  deed,  might  else  have  appeared  doubtful),  imprecated  a  curse 
upon  the  murderer,  and  honoured  Abner  with  a  public  funeral, 
himself  composing  an  elegy  to  his  memory. 

Eshbaal  did  not  long  survive  the  man  who  had  been  the  chief 
supporter  of  his  throne.  Two  of  his  captains,  belonging  to  the 
Gibeonites  whom  Saul  had  in  part  destroyed  and  in  part  expelled 
from  their  homes  and  therefore  having  a  national  grievance  to 
avenge,  entered  his  house  whilst  the  portress,  who  was  cleaning 
wheat,  slept  at  her  task,i  found  him  reposing  during  the  noontide 
heat,  and  slew  him  on  his  bed.  Then  cutting  off  his  head,  they 
proceeded  to  Hebron  to  announce  to  David  that  they  had  avenged 
(as  they  pretended)  his  wrongs  on  the  son  of  his  enemy  Saul. 
David,  however,  rewarded  them  as  he  had  previously  done  the 
Amalekite  who  claimed  to  have  slain  Saul ;  and  by  his  command 
they  were  at  once  executed,  whilst  the  head  of  their  victim  was 
buried  in  the  grave  of  Abner  at  Hebron. 

^  The  LXX.  of  2  Sam.  iv.  6  reads  koX  iSov  ij  0vpu)phi  rod  oXkov  iKdOoupey 
•irvpoi>s  Kal  iyvara^e  Kal  iKcidtvde. 


244  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

There  was  now  no  obstacle  to  the  re-union  of  Israel  under  one 
king,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  there  were  other  sons  of  Saul  aUve 
{2  Sam.  xxi.  8),  besides  a  son  of  Jonathan ;  and  at  an  assembly 
held  at  Hebron^  the  offer  of  the  throne  was  made  to  David  on 
behalf  of  all  the  tribes.  The  limits  to  be  set  to  the  royal 
authority,  and  the  liberties  to  be  assured  to  the  nation,  were 
defined ;  and  the  covenant  between  the  king  and  the  people  was 
ratified  at  the  local  sanctuary.  David,  now  in  his  thirty-eighth 
year,  was  then  anointed,  and  entered  upon  the  reign  to  which,  in 
spite  of  crimes  and  disasters,  subsequent  ages  always  looked  back 
with  feelings  of  pride. 

The  history  of  Saul's  remaining  descendants  may  here  be 
related,  though  the  incidents  recorded  doubtless  took  place  at  a 
later  period  than  that  now  under  review.^  Jonathan  had  left 
behind  him  a  son  named  Meribbaal  or  Mephibosheth,^  who  was 
only  five  years  old  at  the  time  of  his  father's  death.  When  the 
tidings  came  of  the  disaster  at  Gilboa,  his  nurse  in  her  haste  to 
escape  had  dropped  the  child,  and  as  a  result  of  the  fall,  he 
became  lame  in  both  feet.  He  had  subsequently  found  refuge 
with  one  Machir,  the  son  of  Ammiel,  in  Lo-debar,  E.  of  the 
Jordan  {2  Sam.  iv.  4,  ix.  4.).  David,  desirous  to  show  kindness 
to  any  son  of  Jonathan,  learnt  about  him  from  a  servant  of  Saul's, 
named  Ziba ;  and  fetching  him  from  Lo-debar,  he  brought  him  to 
court,  and  gave  him  a  seat  at  the  royal  table,  at  the  same  time 
appointing  Ziba  and  his  family  to  be  servants  to  the  young  prince, 
to  whom  he  restored  the  personal  possessions  of  Saul.  Others  of 
Saul's  descendants,  however,  met  with  a  far  different  fate  from 
that  which  befel  Meribbaal.  On  the  occasion  of  a  famine  which 
lasted  three  years,  the  sufferings  it  caused  were  so  severe  that 
they  appeared  to  be  provoked  by  some  national  sin.  By  the 
Divine  oracle  the  reason  assigned  was  the  destruction  by  Saul  of 

^  In  /  C/i.  xii.  23  foil,  the  numbers  that  attended  at  Hebron  from  the 
various  tribes  are  represented  as  amounting  to  the  astonishing  figure  of 
340,822.  The  relative  quotas  contributed  by  the  several  tribes  are  as 
remarkable  as  the  total,  for  whilst  I20,0CXD  came  from  Reuben,  Gad,  and  half 
Manasseh  (on  the  E.  of  Jordan),  and  156,600  from  the  four  northernmost 
tribes,  only  6,800  came  from  Judah. 

'  See  2  Sam.  c.  ix.,  xxi.  1-14. 

'  I  Ch.  viii.  34,  ix.  40,  2  Sam.  iv.  4.  Like  Eshbaal,  the  name  Meribbaal 
has  been  intentionally,  and  even  more  extensively,  altered  (see  p.  241,  note). 


THE   REIGN   OF   DAVID  245 

the  Gibeonites,  in  violation  of  the  pledge  which  had  been  given 
to  them  by  Israel  in  the  course  of  the  conquest  of  Canaan.^ 
David,  on  receiving  the  reply  of  the  oracle,  allowed  the  Gibeon- 
ites to  choose  whatever  satisfaction  they  preferred.  They 
demanded  the  execution  of  seven  of  Saul's  descendants;  and 
accordingly  two  of  his  sons  by  his  concubine  Rizpah,  and  five  of 
his  grandsons,  the  children  of  his  daughter  Merab^  by  Adriel  the 
Meholathite,  were  hung  at  a  sanctuary^  by  way  of  atonement, 
Meribbaal,  as  the  son  of  Jonathan,  being  specially  exempted  from 
inclusion  among  the  victims,  in  consequence  of  the  friendship 
which  had  existed  between  his  father  and  the  king.  Rizpah 
watched  over  the  corpses  to  prevent  them  from  becoming  the 
prey  of  beasts  and  birds,  until  the  fall  of  rain  seemed  to  indicate 
that  the  Divine  wrath  was  appeased.  Their  bones,  by  David's 
orders,  were  buried  at  Zela,  in  the  sepulchre  of  Kish  the  father  of 
Saul,  to  which  the  bones  of  both  Saul  and  Jonathan  were  also 
conveyed  from  their  resting-place  in  Jabesh  Gilead. 

At  what  period  in  David's  reign  his  kindly  treatment  of  Meribbaal  and 
the  execution  of  Saul's  other  descendants  occurred  cannot  be  determined 
with  precision :  but  the  first  incident  must  have  taken  place  some  time  after 
David  came  to  the  throne,  for  Meribbaal,  who  was  a  child  of  five  when  his 
father  died,  had,  when  he  was  first  brought  to  the  notice  of  the  king,  a  young 
son  called  Mica  {2  Sam.  ix.  12) ;  and  the  second,  from  the  mention  of  Meribbaal 
in  connection  with  it  (xxi.  7),  must  have  been  still  later. 

When  David  had  once  united  the  whole  of  Israel  under  his 
sway,  a  change  in  his  relations  with  the  Philistines  was  inevitable. 
He  thereby  took  his  natural  place  as  the  nation's  champion 
against  their  powerful  enemies ;  and  the  Philistines  were  not 
slow  to  recognise  that  the  long  warfare  between  themselves  and 
Israel  had  entered  upon  its  final  stage  as  soon  as  David  was 
crowned  the  second  time  at  Hebron.  They  quickly  assumed 
the  offensive  and  invaded  Judah.  David,  unable  to  organise  his 
forces  immediately,  took  up  his  position  at  a  stronghold  which  is 
unnamed  by  the  historian,  but  which  has  been  conjectured  to  be 

^  See  Josh.  c.  ix.  The  statement  in  i  Sam.  vii.  14,  there  was  peace  between 
Israel  and  the  Amorites  (where  Amorite  is  perhaps  used  in  a  general  sense, 
cf.  p.  69)  suggests  that  Saul's  act  had  been  altogether  unprovoked. 

'^  The  Heb.  of  2  Sam.  xxi.  8  has  Michal,  but  Michal,  when  taken  from 
David,  was  married  to  Paltiel  (or  Palti),  not  Adriel  (/■  Sam,  xxv.  44). 

'  This  is  suggested  by  the  words  on  the  mountain  before  Jehovah ;  for  the 
latter  part  of  the  phrase  cf.  /  Sam.  i.  22  (compared  with  ver.  24),  xv.  33. 


246  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

AduUam.  The  Philistines  did  not  follow  him  into  the  fastnesses 
of  Judah,  but  with  a  view  to  cutting  him  off  from  the  northern 
tribes  spread  themselves  in  the  valley  of  Rephaim,  between 
Jerusalem  and  Bethlehem.  This  was  probably  the  occasion  of 
the  gallant  exploit  recorded  of  three  of  his  warriors  in  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  13-17.  David,  oppressed  with  thirst,  for  it  was  harvest- 
time,  expressed  a  wish  for  a  draught  of  water  from  the  well  of 
his  native  Bethlehem;  whereupon  the  three  broke  through  the 
host  of  the  Philistines  which  was  encamped  at  Bethlehem,  and 
drawing  water  from  the  well,  brought  it  to  David.  The  king, 
however,  justly  regarding  it  as  having  been  obtained  at  the  risk  of 
his  servants'  lives,  would  not  drink  it,  but  poured  it  out  unto 
Jehovah.  But  whether  the  incident  in  question  is  rightly  placed 
in  this  connection  or  not,  David  did  not  remain  long  in  the  hold, 
but  by  the  command  of  the  Divine  oracle,  advanced  against  the 
enemy,  and  coming  upon  them,  inflicted  a  severe  defeat  at  a  place 
which  came  to  be  called  Baal-pcrazim  ("Baal  of  breakings 
forth  ").^  Their  images,  brought  by  them  into  battle,^  as  the 
Ark  was  by  Israel  at  Ebenezer,  to  promote  the  success  of  their 
arms,  were  captured,  and  (according  to  i  Ch.  xiv.  12)  were 
burnt.  The  enemy's  strength,  however,  was  not  broken  by  this 
reverse;  and  the  invasion  was  renewed  in  the  same  quarter 
as  before.  But  David,  by  this  time,  had  doubtless  been  rein- 
forced, and  was  in  a  position  to  strike  a  more  crushing  blow. 
Again  guided  by  the  priestly  oracle,  he  made  a  circuit,  and 
attacked  the  Philistines  in  the  rear,  and  routing  them,  pursued 
them  from  Gibeon  ^  to  Gezer.  This  disaster,  for  a  time,  checked 
Philistine  aggression,  and  David  was  left  free  to  strengthen  and 
consolidate  his  kingdom. 

The  most  important  step  in  this  direction  was  taken  when  he 
attacked  the  stronghold  of  the  Jebusites  at  Jerusalem,  which, 
ever  since  the  Conquest,  had  resisted  both  capture  and  ab- 
sorption  by   the   IsraeUte   settlers."*     Such  confidence  did   the 

^  C£.  Is.  xxviii.  21.    The  title  Baal  doubtless  refers  to  Jehovah  (see  p.  279). 

2  Cf.  2  Ch.  XXV.  14  (of  the  Edomites). 

'  In  ^  Sam.  v.  25  for  Geba  the  LXX.  has  Gibeon  ;  cf.  7  CA.  xiv.  16. 

*  In  2  Sam.  v.  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  is  recorded  before  the  wars  with 
the  Phihstines  just  related  ;  but  if  the  stronghold  of  the  Jebusites  had  already 
been  in  David's  possession,  he  would  not  have  been  compelled  to  go  down  to 
the  stronghold  of  Adullam. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  247 

inhabitants  feel  in  the  strength  of  their  position  that  they 
tauntingly  affirmed  that  even  the  blind  and  lame  among 
them  would  be  sufficient  to  repel  David's  assault.^  The 
king's  military  skill,  however,  discovered  a  means  of  approach 
by  a  conduit  cut  in  the  rock ;  and  the  stronghold  was 
stormed,  Joab  (according  to  the  Chronicler)  being  the  first  to 
scale  the  walls,  and  thereby  obtaining  the  post  of  chief 
captain,^  which  David  had  promised  to  confer  upon  the  man 
who  was  foremost  in  mounting  the  ramparts.^  In  spite  of  the 
provocation  which  the  defenders  gave,  it  does  not  appear  that 
the  garrison  was  put  indiscriminately  to  the  sword,  since  Jebusites 
survived  as  late  as  the  reign  of  Solomon  (/  Kg.  ix.  20,  cf.  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  18).  For  the  captured  city  itself  a  distinguished  future  was 
in  store.  It  was  clearly  expedient  that  David,  as  king  of  the 
whole  of  Israel,  should  choose  as  his  capital  a  city  which  would 
not  be,  like  Hebron,  too  closely  associated  with  his  own  tribe  of 
Judah,  or  like  Gibeah,  too  much  at  the  mercy  of  the  jealous  tribe 
of  Benjamin,  or  like  Mahanaim,  too  remote  from  the  centre  of 
affairs.  The  recent  acquisition  seemed  to  satisfy  all  the  con- 
ditions. Its  exceptionally  strong  situation  (defended,  as  it  is, 
by  ravines  on  the  W.,  S.,  and  E.),  its  notable  history  under 
native  sovereigns  like  Melchizedek  and  Adonizedek,  the  absence 
of  any  connection  with  one  or  other  of  the  Israelite  tribes  (owing 
to  its  having  remained  till  now  in  the  hands  of  the  old  inhabitants), 
and  its  capture  by  the  king  himself,  all  contributed  to  mark  it  out 
as  the  city  best  suited  to  be  the  new  capital.  Accordingly  David 
took  up  his  residence  there,  and  constructed  additional  fortifica- 
tions,* materials  for  which  he  was  now  able  to  obtain  from  Tyre 

^  In  2  Sam.  v.  6-8  the  sense  seems  best  preserved  in  the  LXX.  The 
incident  seems  to  have  been  regarded  as  the  origin  of  a  popular  saying — 
rv<f)Kol  Kai  xw^ol  ovk  iXeiaouTai  els  qXkov  Kvpiov. 

^  I  Ch.  xi.  6.  But  Joab  appears  to  have  had  the  chief  command  of  David's 
forces  before  this  {2  Sam.  ii.  13  foil.),  and  the  Chronicler's  statement  is  not 
supported  by  the  parallel  passage  in  2  Sam.  v.  8. 

'  According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  vii.  3,  i)  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  was 
effected  in  two  stages,  David  first  storming  the  lower  city,  and  Joab  then 
surmounting  the  defences  of  the  citadel  (d^/aa).  The  city  almost  certainly 
occupied  the  eastern  of  the  two  hills  upon  which  modern  Jerusalem  stands; 
see  further  on  p.  300,  note. 

*  The  Millo  (so  Heb.)  mentioned  in  2  Sam.  v.  9  was  either  a  fort  or  part 
of  the  ramparts,  but  its  situation  is  unknown. 


248  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

by  sea,  the  defeat  of  the  Philistines  having  secured  for  him  access 
to  the  port  of  Joppa.  In  place  of  the  name  Jebus  (if  such  was 
really  applied  to  it),^  the  ancient  title  Urusalim  was  resumed 
under  the  form  Jerusalem ;  but  in  memory  of  its  conqueror  it 
was  often  known  as  "  the  city  of  David." 

Into  his  new  city  David's  piety  prompted  him  to  bring  the  Ark 
of  Jehovah,  with  a  view  to  making  it  the  religious,  as  well  as  the 
poUtical,  capital  of  the  state.  He  accordingly  went,  attended  by 
the  whole  of  his  army  to  the  number  of  30,000  men,  to^  Kiriath 
Jearim  (likewise  called  Kiriath  Baal,  Baalah,  and  Baale  Judah), 
and  taking  it  from  the  house  of  Abinadab  where  the  Ark  had 
remained  ever  since  its  restoration  by  the  Philistines  (z  Satn. 
vii.  1),  proceeded  to  remove  it,  in  joyous  procession,  towards 
Jerusalem.  But  the  occurrence,  at  the  threshing-floor  of  Nacon,^ 
of  the  sudden  death  of  Uzzah,^  one  of  the  men  who  had  charge 
of  the  cart  conveying  the  Ark,  which  was  ascribed  to  his  rashly 
touching  the  sacred  emblem  when  it  was  in  danger  of  being 
thrown  down  by  the  restiveness  of  the  oxen,  so  awed  the  king 
that  he  did  not  go  further  with  it,  but  left  it  in  the  care  of  a 
certain  Obed-edom,^  with  whom  it  stayed  three  months.  At  the 
expiration  of  that  time,  the  prosperity  which  had  fallen  to  Obed- 
edom  during  the  sojourn  of  the  Ark  with  him,  led  David  to 
believe  that  the  Divine  anger  was  appeased,  and  that  he  might 
safely  bring  it  within  the  walls  of  his  capital.  He  therefore 
conveyed  it  to  Jerusalem — this  time  seemingly  on  men's 
shoulders  {2  Sam.  vi.  13) — with  great  rejoicings,  offering  sacri- 
fices at  short  intervals  during  the  journey,  and  himself  dancing 
in  priestly  garb  before  it.  On  reaching  the  city,  it  was  placed  in 
a  tent  prepared  for  it,  and  a  sacrificial  feast  was  held,  at  the  con- 
clusion of  which  David  blessed  the  people  and  dismissed  them 
with  the  customary  gifts.  Michal,  the  daughter  of  Saul,  ridi- 
culed her  husband  for  his  conduct  in  the  procession,  but  was 

^  Some  authorities  have  suspected  that  this  name  has  been  simply  deduced 
from  that  of  the  tribe  that  occupied  the  city,  and  was  never  really  used. 
2  So  7  Ch.  xiii.  6  for  the  from  of  2  Sam.  vi.  2. 
^  In  /  Ch.  xiii.  9,  Chidon. 

*  The  son,  or  perhaps  grandson,  of  Abinadab. 

*  Obed-edom  is  described  as  a  Gittite  in  2  Sam.  vi.  10,  but  in  /  Ch.  he  is 
reckoned  among  the  Levites.  A  Gath-rimmon  Is  named  among  the  Levitical 
cities  in  Josh.  xxi.  24. 


THE   REIGN    OF   DAVID  249 

pointedly  rebuked   by   him;   and  to  her  irreligious  speech  her 

subsequent  childlessness  was  popularly  attributed. 

In  r  Ch.  XV.  13  the  misfortune  attending  the  first  attempt  to  remove  the 
Ark  from  Kiriath  Jearim  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  Levites  did  not  bear 
it ;  and  accordingly  when  it  was  finally  taken  from  the  house  of  Obed-edom, 
it  is  represented  as  being  carried  by  Levites,  whilst  the  Priests  blew  with  the 
trumpets  (ver.  24),  in  obedience  to  the  law  contained  in  Num.  vii.  9,  x.  8. 
But  of  this  explanation  no  hint  is  given  in  the  narrative  of  2  Sam.  vL  ;  and 
as  is  shown  elsewhere,  the  Pentateuchal  laws  distinguishing  between  Priests 
and  Levites,  and  regulating  their  respective  duties,  are  difficult  to  harmonise 
with  the  prevailing  practice  of  this,  or  even  a  later,  time. 

Having  thus  established  a  centre  of  government,  David  turned 
his  thoughts  to  foreign  conquest.  It  was  probably  with  this  in 
view  that  he  formed  the  design  of  numbering  the  people,  the 
existing  account  of  which  leaves  the  occasion  altogether  un- 
certain {2  Sam.  c.  xxiv.)i  The  character  of  the  census  was 
avowedly  military.  Hitherto  there  had  been  no  standing  army 
in  Israel  (though  David  during  his  exile  had  formed  the  nucleus 
of  such  in  his  band  of  600),  and  all  national  emergencies  were 
met  by  the  calling  out  of  temporary  levies.  It  may  reasonably 
be  concluded  therefore  that  the  numbering  of  all  who  were 
capable  of  bearing  arms  (xxiv.  9)  was  preliminary  to  a  stricter 
military  organisation  than  had  hitherto  prevailed.  Such  a 
project,  however,  threatening  as  it  did  to  curtail  further  the 
liberties  of  a  people  as  yet  impatient  of  the  restraints  of  a 
central  government,  met  with  popular  disapproval;  and  Joab, 
who  was  in  touch  with  the  national  sentiment,  made  a  vigorous 
protest  against  the  king's  proposal.  But  his  opposition  was  vain ; 
and  he  himself,  with  the  other  officers  of  the  host,  was  entrusted 
with  the  duty  of  carrying  out  the  work.  It  occupied  nine 
months  and  twenty  days;  and  at  the  end  of  this  period  the 
result  of  the  enquiry  was  brought  to  David.  Unfortunately  the 
information  ascertained  has  not  come  down  in  a  trustworthy 
form,  for  the  figures  recorded  are  incredibly  large,  the  number  of 
men  drawing  the  sword  being  stated  as  800,000  for  Israel,  and 
500,000  for  Judah ;  whilst  the  Chronicler  (/  Ch,  xxi.  5-6),  who 

^  That  a  belief  prevailed  amongst  the  Hebrews  that  to  take  the  number  of 
the  people  was  perilous  unless  accompanied  by  a  propitiatory  offering  is 
indicated  in  Ex.  xxx.  12  (P) ;  though  the  injunction  there  imposed  may  have 
been  occasioned  by  the  narrative  in  the  text.  Josephus  explains  that  David 
sinned  by  neglecting  this  ordinance. 


250  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

alters  them  to  1,100,000  and  470,000  respectively,  adds  that  the 
tribes  of  Levi  and  Benjamin  were  not  included. 

It  was  not  long  before  the  king  came  to  believe  that  his  act 
was  not  only  condemned  by  his  most  faithful  advisers,  but  had 
also  excited  the  anger  of  Heaven. ^  A  pestilence  broke  out  in 
the  time  of  wheat  harvest  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  15  LXX.,  cf.  i  Ch.  xxi.  20) 
and  caused  great  ravages  among  the  population ;  and  in  accord- 
ance with  the  habits  of  thought  of  that  age,  it  was  inferred  to  be 
due  to  the  recent  census.  To  stay  the  plague,  David,  when  near 
the  threshing-floor  of  Araunah  (or  Oman,  /  Ch.  xxi.  15),  a 
Jebusite  (possibly  even  the  dispossessed  king  of  Jebus,  2  Sam. 
xxiv.  23  marg.),  was  directed  by  the  prophet  Gad  to  raise  an 
altar  there.  Araunah  generously  offered  the  ground  for  nothing, 
together  with  all  the  requisites  for  a  sacrifice ;  but  David  insisted 
upon  purchasing  it  at  a  price  before  he  would  consent  to  use  it. 
Sacrifice  was  then  duly  offered,  and  the  plague  was  mercifully 
abated. 

According  to  the  narrative  of  2  Sam.  xxiv.,  /  Ch.  xxi.,  the  prophet  Gad 
was  sent  to  David,  prior  to  the  occurrence  of  any  calamity,  to  bid  him  choose 
one  of  three  chastisements,  viz.  seven  years  of  famine  (LXX.  and  /  Ch.^  three 
years),  three  months'  flight  before  his  foes,  or  three  days'  pestilence  ;  and 
David  choosing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  Jehovah  rather  than  into  the  hands 
of  man,  the  chastisement  inflicted  was  a  pestilence. 

The  Chronicler,  to  explain  the  fact  that  David  sacrificed  at  the  threshing- 
floor  of  Araunah  (Oman)  instead  of  at  the  Tabernacle,  relates  that  the  latter 
was  at  Gibeon  (cf.  xvi.  39),  and  that  David  was  afraid  to  go  there  because  of 
the  pestilence.  But  the  Tal)ernacle,  apart  from  the  Ark,  had  no  raison  d'etre  ; 
and  the  Ark  at  this  time  was  at  Jerusalem.  It  would  appear,  however,  that 
Gibeon  was  really  the  seat  of  a  sanctuary  ;  see  /  Kg.  iii.  4. 

There  is  a  discrepancy  between  2  Sam.  xxiv.  24  and  /  Ch.  xxi.  25  respecting 
the  sum  paid  by  David  to  Araunah,  the  former  making  it  50  shekels  of  silver, 
and  the  latter  600  shekels  of  gold. 

But  though  the  numbering  and  enrolment  of  the  people  was 
thus  thought  to  have  excited  the  displeasure  of  Jehovah,  and 
though  the  burdens  to  which  it  was  a  preliminary  probably  pro- 
duced much  of  the  popular  discontent  which  marred  the  latter 
part  of  David's  reign,  it  must  have  contributed  not  a  little  to 
the  success  which  now  attended  the  king's  foreign  campaigns. 

*  2  Sam.  c.  xxiv.  belongs  to  a  section  (xxi. -xxiv.)  which  forms  an  appendix 
to  the  regular  narrative  of  David's  reign,  the  contents  being  brought  together 
for  other  than  chronological  reasons.  C.  xxiv.  was  perhaps  originally  linked 
to  xxi.  1-14  by  similarity  of  subject  (both  relating  the  history  of  a  national 
aflSiction),  the  other  parts  of  the  section  being  subsequent  insertions. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  251 

A  description  of  his  military  organisation  is  reserved  until  later : 
for  the  present  it  will  be  more  convenient  to  pursue  the  general 
course  of  the  history.  A  renewal  of  hostilities  with  the  Philistines 
gave  him  an  opportunity  of  finally  quelling  his  restless  neighbours. 
By  the  capture  of  a  fortress  called  Metheg  Atnmah  ("  the  bridle 
of  the  mother-city  "i),  he  effectually  put  a  stop  to  their  incursions 
into  Israelite  territory.  The  place  in  question  was  probably  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Gath ;  and  it  is  the  latter  city  itself,  with 
its  dependent  towns,  which  the  Chronicler  (z  Ch.  xviii.  i),  in  his 
account  of  the  war,  represents  as  having  been  taken ;  but  if  so, 
it  must  have  been  restored  on  conditions,  for  it  was  independent 
early  in  the  reign  of  Solomon  (z  Kg.  ii.  39).  In  the  course  of  the 
campaign,  David  on  one  occasion  nearly  lost  his  Ufe,  being 
attacked,  when  weary  and  spent,  by  a  gigantic  Philistine.^  The 
giant  was  killed  by  Abishai,  who  came  to  the  king's  assistance ; 
but  the  danger  incurred  was  so  great  that  the  troops  insisted  that 
David  should  not  again  venture  so  precious  a  life  in  battle 
{2  Sam.  xxi.  15-17).  Abishai's  exploit  was  emulated  by  three 
others  of  David's  warriors,  Sibbecai,  Elhanan,  and  Jonathan  (the 
last  being  David's  nephew),  who  each  encountered  and  slew  a 
champion  of  great  stature,  survivors,  presumably,  of  the  abori- 
ginal Rephaim^  who  had  become  absorbed  among  the  Philistine 
settlers  {2  Sam.  xxi.  i8-2  2).3  When  further  aggression  had  thus 
been  rendered  impossible,  relations  between  the  two  nations 
became  more  amicable ;  and  some  of  the  Philistines  found  scope 
for  their  warlike  qualities  by  taking  service  with  their  conqueror, 
the  Pelethites  and  Cherethites  of  David's  body-guard  being 
probably   of  Philistine  and   Cretan   origin,   whilst   the   Gittites 

^  The  phrase  may  perhaps  imply  that  it  commanded  the  surrounding 
district. 

^  His  name  is  given  as  hhbibenob ;  but  the  word  is  perhaps  corrupt,  the 
last  element  indicating  the  scene  of  the  encounter  (Nob,  or  perhaps  Gob,  see 
xxi.  18,  19). 

'  The  name  of  the  Philistine  slain  by  Elhanan  (a  Bethlehemite)  was 
Goliath  ;  and  as  this  conflicts  with  the  account  of  Goliath's  death  at  the  hands 
of  David  {i  Sam.  xvii.),  the  Chronicler  (/  Ch.  xx.  5)  styles  him  Lahnti  the 
brother  of  Goliath^  the  inserted  words  being  partly  a  corruption  of  the  appella- 
tion Bethkheviitt  applied  to  Elhanan.  On  the  other  hand,  the  name  of 
Elhanan's  father  is  probably  given  correctly  in  Chronicles  zs,  Jair  (not  Jaare- 
oreginty  as  in  -?  Sam. ). 


252  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

mentioned  with  them  indicate  their  nationaHty  by  their  name 
(2  Sam.  viii.  18,  xv.  18). 

The  next  war  in  which  David  engaged  was  with  the  Moabites. 
During  the  Ufetime  of  Saul,  David  had  entrusted  his  father 
and  mother  to  the  care  of  the  Moabite  king;  and  the  reasons 
which  converted  this  friendly  intercourse  into  rancorous  hostility 
are  altogether  obscure.  The  success  of  Israel  in  the  war  was 
complete;  and  terrible  vengeance  was  inflicted  upon  the  con- 
quered army,  two-thirds  of  them  being  put  to  death  in  cold 
blood.  The  country  was  made  tributary,  and  did  not  regain  its 
independence  until  the  reign  of  Ahab  {2  Kg.  iii.  4  foil.,  see  p.  338). 

The  successes  of  David  over  Moab  endangered  the  safety  of 
the  adjoining  states,  and  the  Ammonites  determined  to  pre- 
cipitate a  struggle  before  the  rising  kingdom  of  Israel  became 
too  strong  for  them.  An  opportunity  to  do  so  came  when  an 
Israelite  embassy  arrived  to  pay  respect  to  their  king  Hanun, 
who  had  only  recently  succeeded  to  the  throne,  and  whose  father, 
Nahash,  perhaps  from  hostiUty  to  Saul,  had  shown  kindness  to 
David.  The  envoys  were  represented  as  having  been  sent  with 
the  sinister  purpose  of  espial,  and  on  this  pretence  were  grossly 
insulted  and  dismissed.  The  nation  then  prepared  for  the  in- 
evitable conflict  by  obtaining  help  from  the  kings  of  Zobah,^ 
Rehob  (or  Beth-rehob),^  Maacah,^  and  Tob.*  Of  these  Hada- 
dezer,^  the  king  of  Zobah,  doubtless  had  grievances  of  his  own, 
for  Saul  had  engaged  in  hostihties  with  Zobah,  in  which  the  latter 
country  had  been  worsted  (/  Sam.  xiv.  47).  David,  on  learning 
the  insult  offered  to  his  ambassadors,  allowed  just  a  year  to  pass,^ 

*  A  district  of  Syria,  E.  of  Anti-lebanon.  If  its  city  Berothai  [2  Sam.  viii. 
8)  is  the  Btrothah  of  Ezek.  xlvii.  16,  it  was  probably  between  Damascus  and 
Hamath. 

2  Described  as  near  the  frontiers  of  Hamath  {Num.  xiii.  21)  and  close  to 
the  town  of  Laish  {Jud.  xviii.  28). 

'  Associated  with  Geshur  in  Deut.  iii.  i^,/osh.  xiii.  II ;  and  probably  lying 
on  the  N.  of  Bashan  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Lake  Merom. 

*  Mentioned  in  Jud.  xi.  3  and  placed  by  some  immediately  E.  (or  S.  E, )  of 
the  Lake  of  Chinnereth. 

*  Called  in  2  Sam.  x.  16,  Hadarezer,  The  name  {Hadadezer)  obviously 
contains  the  same  element  as  Benhadad  {i  Kg.  xv.  18),  and  in  formation 
resembles  Azariah,  Eliezer. 

^  \n  2  Sam.  xi.  i  one  reading  gives  at  the  return  of  the  year,  at  tht  time 
when  the  messengers  went  forth. 


THE    REIGN   OF   DAVID  253 

and  tlien  sent  Joab  with  a  large  force  into  the  Ammonite  terri- 
tory. Before  the  gates  of  Medeba^  (which,  as  it  is  accounted  a 
city  of  Reuben  in  Josh.  xiii.  16,  had  perhaps  been  attacked) 
Joab  found  himself  confronted  by  the  Ammonite  army,  whilst 
the  forces  of  Hadadezer  and  his  confederates  were  close  by,  and 
threatened  his  flank.  He  thereupon  divided  his  troops  into  two 
bodies,  and  placing  one  in  charge  of  his  brother  Abishai,  with 
orders  to  keep  the  Ammonites  in  check,  he  himself  assumed 
command  of  the  other,  and  advanced  against  Hadadezer. 
Fortune  attended  both  divisions  of  the  Israelite  army.  Joab 
routed  the  auxiliaries  from  Zobah;  and  the  Ammonites,  seeing 
his  success,  also  gave  way  before  Abishai  and  took  refuge  in  the 
city.  From  Hadadezer  a  large  number  of  men  and  horses  were 
captured,^  and  the  bulk  of  the  latter  were  rendered  useless  by 
David's  orders,  only  sufficient  for  a  hundred  chariots  being 
preserved  {2  Sam.  viii.  4).  In  the  next  campaign  Hadadezer 
obtained  aid  both  from  Damascus  and  from  the  Arameans  be- 
yond the  Euphrates  {2  Sam.  viii.  5,  x.  16);  and  the  combined 
forces  under  Shobach,^  Hadadezer's  captain,  were  met  by  the 
Israelite  army  (which  had  been  increased  by  an  extensive  levy, 
X.  17)  at  Helam.*  The  latter  were  again  successful;  Shobach 
was  slain,  his  forces  completely  routed,^  and  much  treasure 
taken.  The  advantage  thus  gained  was  followed  by  an  advance 
against  the  Arameans  of  Damascus,  who  are  stated  to  have  been 
compelled  to  become  tributaries  and  admit  garrisons  into  their 
cities  (though  it  is  questionable,  in  view  of  i  Kg.  xi.  24,  whether 
the  alleged  submission  was  a  reality).  These  reverses  put  an  end 
to  the  foreign  aid  upon  which  the  Ammonites  had  relied ;  and  the 
next  year  Rabbah,  their  capital,  was  besieged  by  Joab.  Joab  seized 

^  Named  in  /  Ck.  xix.  7.  But  Josephus  and  others  suppose  that  the  city 
near  which  the  battle  was  fought,  and  which  is  unspecified  in  2  Sam.  x.  8, 
was  Rabbah  (cf.  xi.  l). 

2  2 Sam.  viii.  4 gives  1,700  horsemen  and  20,000  foot;  /  Ch.  xviii.  4,  1,000 
chariots,  7,000  horsemen,  20,000  foot. 

2  In  7  Ck.  xix.  16,  Shophach. 

*  The  locality  is  unknown,  and  some  for  they  came  to  Helam  render  their 
force  came. 

'  Their  losses,  according  to  2  Sam.  x.  18,  were  700  chariots  and  40,000 
horsemen;  according  to  i  Ch.  xix.  i8,  7,000  chariots  and  40,000  foot — both 
statements  containing  improbabilities. 


254  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

a  position  which  commanded  the  water  supply,  and  before  the 
final  assault  upon  the  city  was  delivered,  he  urged  the  king  to 
take  command  of  the  army  in  person  that  he  might  obtain  the 
credit  of  its  capture.^  He  accordingly  did  so;  Rabbah  was 
stormed  and  plundered;  and  the  precious  jewel  which  adorned 
the  crown  worn  by  the  image  of  the  god  Milcom  was  taken  and 
placed  on  David's  head.^  The  prisoners  (according  to  the  re- 
ceived reading  of  2  Sam.  xii.  31)  were  treated  with  great  bar- 
barity; and  similar  cruelties  were  inflicted  upon  the  inhabitants 
of  all  the  other  cities  taken. ^ 

The  account  of  the  war  with  Zobah  and  its  Aramean  allies  in  2  Sam.  viii. 
3  foil,  appears  again,  with  some  variations,  in  x.  6  foil.  In  the  text  the  two 
narratives  have  been  regarded  as,  in  the  main,  complementary ;  but  it  is 
possible  that  one  of  them  is  only  an  inferior  version  of  the  other. 

David's  next  conquest  was  obtained  over  Edom.*  The 
Edomites  had  previously  been  invaded  by  Saul  (/  Sam.  xiv.  47) ; 
but  it  was  reserved  for  David  to  subjugate  them.  The  campaign 
was  conducted  under  the  general  direction  of  Joab  (i  Kg.  xi.  16, 
cf  Fs.  Ix.  title);  but  it  was  a  victory  gained  by  his  brother 
Abishai  (Abshai)  in  the  Valley  of  Salt,  S.  of  the  Dead  Sea 
(7  Ch.  xviii.  12),  that  brought  about  the  occupation  of  the 
country,  and  this  was  followed  (it  is  said)  by  the  almost  entire 
extermination  of  the  male  population.  A  few  survivors  only, 
including  a  young  prince  called  Hadad,  succeeded  in  escaping 
to  Egypt  (7  Kg.  xi.  15-17).  The  land  was  then  made  tributary, 
and  garrisons  were  estabUshed  in  it.     This  conquest  secured  for 

^  So  Jerusalem  was  called  the  city  of  David  (p.  248). 

^  The  weight  of  the  crown  (a  talent,  about  96  lbs.)  makes  it  improbable 
that  it  was  worn  by  the  Ammonite  king,  or  could  be  worn  by  David ;  and 
hence  the  words  it  was  set  on  David's  head  are  best  referred  to  the  precious 
stone  (so  the  Heb. )  that  was  in  it. 

'  The  infliction  of  barbarous  punishments  upon  defeated  enemies  was 
widely  prevalent  among  Eastern  nations  generally,  both  at  this  and  subsequent 
periods  :  for  instance,  the  Assyrian  king  Asshurnasirpal  (884-860)  relates  that 
he  impaled  some  of  his  captives,  and  ripped  up,  or  flayed  alive,  others  (see 
Maspero,  The  Passing  of  the  Empires^  p.  20).  But  in  regard  to  the  statement 
in  2  Sam.  xii.  31  respecting  David,  a  slight  alteration  of  the  text  gives  the 
meaning  he  put  them  to  saws  and  harrows  of  iron,  and  axes  of  iron,  and  made 
them  labour  at  the  brick-mould,  and  so  describes  the  employments  to  which 
the  prisoners  were  condemned.  The  correction,  however,  is  inadmissible  in 
/  Ch.  XX.  3. 

*  In  i  Sam.  viii.  13  Syrians  must  be  read  for  Edomites. 


THE   REIGN   OF   DAVID  255 

Israel  the  control  of  the  valuable  trade  passing  between  Arabia 
and  the  countries  bordering  on  the  Euphrates ;  whilst  it  also  gave 
it  the  command  of  two  seaports,  Elath  and  Ezion-geber,  which 
were  developed  in  the  reign  of  Solomon.  Amongst  other  opera- 
tions in  the  South  probably  executed  about  this  time  was  a  war 
with  Amalek,  but  no  details  of  it  have  been  preserved  {2  Sam. 
viii.  12). 

Of  the  vast  quantity  of  spoil  taken  in  these  different  wars 
(see  2  Sam.  viii.  7-12,  i  Ch.  xviii.  7-8,  11),  David  dedicated 
a  large  part  to  the  service  of  Jehovah.  These  offerings  were 
increased  by  presents  sent  to  him  by  Toi,^  the  king  of  Hamath, 
through  his  son  Hadoram.2  Toi  was  an  enemy  of  Hadadezer; 
and  on  the  defeat  of  the  latter,  which  probably  relieved  him  of  a 
formidable  adversary,  he  took  this  means  of  congratulating  the 
conqueror.  Friendly  relations  also  existed  between  David  and 
Hiram,^  the  king  of  Tyre.  The  Phoenicians  and  the  Israelites 
were,  in  their  situation  and  habits,  each  other's  complements, 
the  former  being  devoted  to  commerce  and  the  mechanical  arts, 
and  the  latter  being  engaged  almost  exclusively  in  pastoral  and 
agricultural  occupations.  A  profitable  trade  could  consequently 
be  carried  on  between  the  two  peoples ;  and  from  Hiram  David 
obtained  both  workmen  and  materials  for  the  buildings  with 
which  he  planned  to  adorn  his  capital.  After  erecting  a  palace 
for  himself,  he  turned  his  thoughts,  on  the  termination  of  his 
wars  of  conquest,  towards  constructing  a  fitting  shrine  for  the 
Ark  of  Jehovah.  At  first  the  proposal  was  commended  by 
the  prophet  Nathan ;  but  subsequently  a  dream  (it  is  said)  led 
him  to  declare  that  the  project  was  opposed  to  the  Divine  will. 
If  the  prophet's  final  opposition  was  in  any  way  the  result  of 
later  reflection,  it  may  be  conjectured  that  he  feared  the  corrupt- 
ing influence  upon  the  national  worship  of  Tyrian  ideas  and 
Tyrian  art.  But  though  David,  in  accordance  with  the  prophet's 
direction,  relinquished  the  design  of  building  a  temple  himself, 
he  prepared  the  means  for  his  successor  to  accomplish  it.     He 

1  In  /  Ch.  xviii.  9  Tou,  LXX.  Qbov. 

^  So  ^  Ch.  xviii.  10.  The  parallel  passage  2  Sam.  viii.  10  hAsJoram^  but 
the  LXX.  lebdovpdv  is  in  favour  of  the  reading  of  Chron. 

'  The  king  of  Tyre  who  was  contemporary  with  Solomon  bore  the  same 
name  (/  Kg.  v.  i),  and  was  probably  the  same  person. 


256  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

continued  to  amass  treasure  with  this  end  in  view;  and  it  was 
finally  achieved  by  Solomon. 

The  Chronicler  gives  an  account  of  the  offerings  made  by  the  king  and  by 
the  chiefs  of  the  people,  which,  if  the  figures  have  not  undergone  great  corrup- 
tion, must  be  enormously  exaggerated  (/  Ch.  xxii.  14,  100,000  talenti  of  goti^ 
1,000,000  talents  of  silver ;  cf.  also  xxix,  3-7).  He  also  represents  David  as 
appointing  for  the  contemplated  Temple  overseers,  singers,  and  doorkeepers 
which  are  numbered  by  thousands  (/  Ch.  c.  xxiii. ).  David  is  also  stated  to 
have  received  from  God  Himself  a  pattern  of  the  Temple  and  its  furniture, 
which  he  bequeathed  to  Solomon  (/  Ch.  xxviii.  11-19). 

At  this  point  it  will  be  convenient  to  anticipate  part  of  what 
has  yet  to  be  related  and  to  pass  briefly  under  review  David's 
dominions,  his  family  and  court,  his  army,  the  agencies  for 
securing  justice,  and  the  internal  constitution  of  the  kingdom 
generally.  In  such  a  review  some  of  the  evidence  appealed  to 
is  derived  from  the  records  of  later  reigns;  but  it  is  probable 
that  the  institutions  in  question  were  of  long  standing  in  Israel, 
and  that  no  serious  anachronism  will  be  involved  in  consequence 
of  the  course  adopted. 

I.  As  the  result  of  the  successful  wars  previously  described, 
David's  dominions  included,  in  addition  to  the  united  tribes  of 
Israel,  the  territories  of  Edom  and  Moab,  and  possibly  Zobah 
and  part  of  Ammon.  Over  Edom  which  lay  so  near  Judah 
David  probably  exercised  direct  control,  placing  garrisons  in 
the  country  and  occuppng  the  ports  of  Elath  and  Ezion-geber. 
Moab,  which  was  more  remote  from  the  capital,  was  made 
tributary,  and  if  the  account  of  the  tribute  paid  at  a  later  period 
to  an  Israelite  king  be  any  guide,  it  must  have  been  a  valuable 
dependency.  The  Ammonites,  who,  Hke  the  Moabites,  had 
experienced  severe  treatment,  and  had  seen  their  capital  Rabbah 
captured,  probably  also  became  tributaries  (cf.  2  Sam.  xvii.  27-29); 
but  Israel's  hold  over  this  border  people  is  not  likely  to  have 
been  very  firm.  On  the  north,  Zobah  was  probably  a  subject 
state;  and  David  is  said  to  have  placed  garrisons  in  the  neigh- 
bouring Damascus,  though  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  really 
exercised  much  authority  over  the  latter.  But  tranquillity  on 
this  side  was  secured  not  only  by  the  defeats  inflicted  upon 
the  S>Tian  peoples  in  general,  but  also  by  the  alliance  with 
Toi,  king  of  Hamath,  who  (as  has  been  said)  was  an  enemy 


THE   REIGN  OF  DAVID  257 

of  the  king  of  Zobah.  Broadly  speaking,  David's  empire  may 
be  described  as  extending  from  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
valley  between  the  Lebanons  to  the  Gulf  of  Akaba,  and  from 
the  Mediterranean  to  the  Syrian  desert.  But  it  is  probable  that 
only  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Joppa  did  it  actually  touch  the 
sea :  north  of  this  the  Phoenician  towns  of  Tyre  and  Zidon 
were  left  unmolested ;  whilst  in  the  S.W.  the  Philistines,  though 
their  strength  was  crippled,  maintained  their  independence.  The 
expansion  of  Israelite  sovereignty  which  this  account  implies  is 
remarkable  for  the  rapidity  with  which  it  was  accomplished. 
Less  than  two  generations  saw  the  Hebrews  transformed  from 
an  unorganised  aggregate  of  tribes,  sustaining  a  precarious 
struggle  with  aggressive  and  powerful  foes,  into  a  dominant 
power,  holding  in  tribute  its  near  neighbours  and  respected  and 
feared  by  those  more  remote. 

2.  David's  sons,  so  far  as  can  be  gathered  from  the  various 
lists  preserved  {2  Sam.  iii.  2-5,  v.  13-16,  i  Ch.  iii.  1-9,  xiv.  3-7), 
were  as  follows  : — 

1.  Amnon  (by  Ahinoam).         10.  Solomon  or 

2.  Chileab   or  Daniel   (by  Jedidiah  (by  Bathsheba). 

Abigail).  11.  Ibhar. 

3.  Absalom  (by  Maacah).  12.  Elishua  t?r  Elishama. 

4.  Adonijah  (by  Haggith).  13.  Nepheg. 

5.  Shephatiah  (by  Abital).  14.  Japhia. 

6.  Ithream  (by  Eglah).  15.  Elishama. 

7.  Shammua  or  16.  Eliada  or  Beeliada. 
Shimeah  (by  Bathsheba).  17.  Eliphelet  ^r  Elpelet. 

8.  Shobab  „  18.  Nogah. 

9.  Nathan  „ 

Another  son,  named  Jerimoth,  who  is  not  included  in  the 
above-mentioned  lists,  is  alluded  to  in  2  Ch.  xi.  18  and  may 
have  been  the  offspring  of  a  concubine  (cf.  i  Ch.  iii.  9).  David 
appears  to  have  had  daughters  also  (2  Sam.  v.  13,  /  Ch.  xiv.  3), 
but  the  name  of  only  one,  Tamar,  is  known.  The  practice  of 
polygamy  was  usual  in  the  East  amongst  those  who  were  rich 
enough  to  maintain  a  harem  ;  and  the  number  of  David's  wives 
indicates  his  wealth  and  dignity  as  well  as  his  luxury.  David  was, 
no  doubt,  a  man  of  less  simple  tastes  than  Saul  j  but  the  greater 
S 


258  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

pomp  and  circumstance  with  which  the  former  surrounded  himself 
witnesses  as  much  to  the  increased  prosperity  and  importance 
of  the  nation  as  to  the  pleasure-loving  character  of  its  king. 

3.  Of  David's  civil  ministers  the  most  important  were  the 
Recorder,  the  Scribe,  and  the  officer  who  presided  over  the 
Levy  or  corvee.  The  first  of  these  would  appear,  by  his  name, 
to  have  kept  the  state  archives;  but  he  probably  also  acted  as  one 
of  the  king's  chief  counsellors,  and  was  a  personage  of  high  rank 
and  distinction  (cf.  2  Kg.  xviii.  18,  37).  The  office  was  held 
throughout  David's  reign  by  Jehoshaphat,  the  son  of  Ahilud. 
The  Scribe  was  the  royal  secretary.  His  was  also  an  office  of 
great  dignity;  and  was  filled  by  two  persons  in  succession  in 
David's  lifetime,  Seraiah  {2  Sam.  viii.  17)  and  Sheva  {2  Sam. 
XX.  25).  The  president  of  the  Levy  was  Adoniram.^  This  was 
perhaps  an  office  which  was  not  constituted  until  late  in  David's 
reign,  when  he  was  prosecuting  his  great  building  schemes.  It 
is  mentioned  only  in  the  second  of  the  two  lists  of  officials  given 
in  2  Sam. ;  and  Adoniram  not  only  lived  through  the  reign  of 
Solomon,  but  survived  until  that  of  Rehoboam.  A  courtier  who, 
without  discharging  any  specified  duties,  is  described  (in  2  Sam. 
XV.  12,  J  Ch.  xxvii.  33)  merely  as  the  king's  counsellor,  was 
Ahitophel,  a  man  who  came  into  prominence  in  some  of  the 
troubles  that  filled  the  latter  part  of  David's  reign.  The  same 
title  of  counsellor  is  likewise  given  in  i  Ch.  xxvii.  32  to  Jonathan, 
David's  nephew  (see  i  Ch.  xx.  7) ;  and  another  person  who 
similarly  occupied  an  informal  position  of  influence  was  Hushai 
{2  Sam,  XV.  37,  i"  Ch.  xxvii.  33).  In  i  Ch.  xxvii.  25-31  a 
number  of  inferior  officials,  whose  names  it  is  unnecessary  to 
reproduce  here,  are  mentioned  as  having  the  care  of  the  king's 
private  possessions.  In  addition  to  the  lay  ministers  just 
enumerated,  the  priests  Zadok  and  Abiathar  were  doubtless  often 
consulted  as  state-advisers.  The  precise  relation  between  these 
two  priests  is  obscure ;  though  if  i  Ch.  xvi.  39  could  be  relied 
on,  it  might  be  inferred  that  Zadok  ordinarily  ministered  at  the 
"  high  place  "  (or  sanctuary)  of  Gibeon,  whilst  Abiathar  attended 
the  king  at  Jerusalem.     But  in  2  Sam.  xv.  24,  Zadok,  as  well  as 

^  In  -?  Sam.  xx.  24  Adoram  ;  but  the  LXX.  has  Aduyeipdfi,  and  the  same 
appears  in  /  /Q.  iv.  6. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  259 

Abiathar,  is  found  in  charge  of  the  Ark  at  Jerusalem.  Both  of 
them  were  Levitcs  and  descendants  of  Aaron,  the  former  being 
sprung  from  Eleazar  and  the  latter  from  Ithamar  (/  Ch.  xxiv. 
3,  6).i  But  according  to  the  testimony  of  2  Sam.  others  than 
Levites  also  acted  as  priests,  among  them  being  David's  own 
sons  {2  Sam.  viii,  18),  and  a  certain  Ira,  a  Jairite  (2  Sam.  xx.  26), 
who  perhaps  belonged  to  the  tribe  of  Manasseh  {Nuvi.  xxxii.  41). 
Such  an  arrangement  was  so  alien  to  the  spirit  of  later  times  that 
in  2  Sa?n.  viii.  18  the  LXX.,  in  place  oi  priests,  reads  avXdp^ai^ 
whilst  I  Ch.  xviii.  1 7  substitutes  chief  about  the  king. 

4.  The  national  army — styled  "the  host" — was  probably  a 
militia,  called  out  when  needed  (cf.  i  Kg.  xv.  22)  to  go  on 
expeditions,  but  dismissed  again  as  soon  as  the  need  had  ceased 
(cf.  I  Kg.  xxii.  36).  This  was  under  the  command  of  Joab, 
who  is  entitled  "captain  of  the  host."  But  the  nucleus  of  a 
standing  army  was  constituted  by  a  permanent  body-guard  of 
some  600  men,  consisting  of  Cherethites,  Pelethites,  and  Gittites 
{2  Sam.  XV.  18).  The  origin  of  the  Gittites  is  obvious;  and 
it  is  in  every  way  probable  that  the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites 
were  also  Philistines,  the  latter  term  being  perhaps  only  another 
form  of  the  national  name  (Heb.  Pelishtim),  and  the  former  being 
derived  from  Crete,  with  which  Caphtor,  the  original  home  of  the 
Philistines,  is  generally  identified.  But  if  the  Cherethites  were 
Philistines,  they  appear  to  have  been  outside  the  confederated 
five  cities;  for  David  when  at  Gath  represented  to  Achish  that 
his  attacks  had  been  directed  against  the  south  of  the  Cherethites 
(7  Sam.  XXX.  14).  It  is  not  unlikely  (as  has  been  already 
suggested)  that  this  force  was  enrolled  at  the  conclusion  of 
David's  Philistine  wars.  The  doubts  which  he  may  at  first 
have  reasonably  entertained  respecting  the  attachment  of  his 
countrymen  to  the  crown  would  show  him  the  expediency  of 
having  about  him  a  force  detached  from  the  national  sympathies  j^ 
and  his  acquaintance  with  Philistia  easily  enabled  him  to  find 

^  In  2  Sam.  viii.  17,  v  Ch.  xxiv.  6  Ahimelech  the  son  of  Abiathar  is 
probably  an  error  for  Abiathar  the  so7i  of  Ahiinelech  ;  whilst  in  /  Ch.  xxiv. 
3,  31  Ahimelech  is  likewise  a  mistake  for  Abiathar  (see  i  Sam,  xxii.  20, 
2  Sam.  XV.  29,  XX.  25,  /  Kg.  i.  7). 

^  Comparisons  have  frequently  been  drawn  between  these  troops  and  the 
Swiss  guards  of  the  French  kings  in  the  i8th  century. 


26o  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

what  he  required.  The  subsequent  history  will  show  that  both 
his  foresight  in  anticipating  the  need  of  such  a  corps,  and  his 
sagacity  in  selecting  the  men  who  were  to  compose  it,  were 
amply  justified.  The  command  of  this  body  was  entrusted 
to  Benaiah,  who  is  also  described  (2  Sam.  xxiii.  22,  23  marg.) 
as  set  over  David's  council — perhaps  as  guard  of  the  council- 
chamber  ;  ^  and  the  troop  was  presumably  kept  in  the  capital,  in 
close  attendance  upon  the  king  (cf.  i  Kg.  \.  44).  A  comparison 
of  this  last  passage  with  i  Kg.  i.  8  suggests  that  this  force  of 
Cherethites  and  Pelethites  was  also  known  as  "  the  Mighty  men  " 
(Gibborini).  But  by  the  latter  name  was  specially  designated 
a  smaller  body  of  distinguished  warriors,  who  perhaps  acted  as 
officers  of  the  600,  or  of  the  national  levies  (cf.  i  Ch.  xxvii.  i  foil). 
They  were  nominally  thirty  in  number,  though  more  than  thirty 
are  actually  named  in  the  lists  in  2  Sam.  xxiii.  24-39,  ^  ^^-  xi. 
26-47,  the  latter,  indeed,  amounting  to  forty-six.^  Some  of  these 
were  likewise  foreigners,  including  a  Maacathite,  a  Hittite,^  a  native 
of  Zobah,  and  (according  to  i  Ch.  xi.  46)  a  Moabite.  Superior 
in  rank  and  dignity  to  the  Thirty  were  two  officers,  one  of  them 
being  the  Captain  of  the  Guard,  Benaiah  (cf.  i  Ch.  xxvii.  6), 
of  whom  three  notable  exploits  are  recorded  {2  Sam.  xxiii.  20,  21), 
and  the  other  Abishai,  the  brother  of  Joab.  But  in  point  of 
reputation  for  personal  prowess  even  Benaiah  and  Abishai  were 
held  inferior  to  three  captains  who  were  known  par  excellence  as 
"the  Three."  These  were  (i)  Joshebbeshebeth  or  Jashobeam,* 
(2)  Eleazar  the  son  of  Dodai,  (3)  Shammah  the  son  of  Agee. 
These  were  apparently  the  three  who,  when  the  Philistines  were 
in  occupation  of  Bethlehem,  and  David  longed  for  a  draught 
of  water  from  the  well  by  the  gate,  broke  through  the  enemy's 
host  and  gave  him  what  he  desired. 

1  LXX.  traJ^ev  avrbv  AauiS  irph^  tAj  d/coots  avrov. 

*  The  name  of  Ishmaiah  the  Gibeonite,  styled  in  /  Ch.  xii.  4  "a  mighty 
man  among  the  thirty,  and  over  the  thirty,"  does  not  appear  in  either  of  the 
two  Usts  referred  to. 

2  Another  Hittite  in  David's  service,  besides  Uriah,  was  Ahimelech 
(/  Sam.  xxvi.  6). 

*  In  -2  Sam.  xxiii.  8  the  addition  the  same  was  Adino  the  Eznite  is  unii> 
telligible. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  261 

The  relation  which  the  "Three "  bore  to  the  "  Thirty  "  is  very  obscure.  In 
2  Sam.  xxiii.  19  Abishai  is  styled  "most  honourable  of  the  Three"— a  state- 
ment which  has  been  taken  to  mean  that  he  and  Benaiah  and  another 
(unknown)  constituted  a  second  Three,  who  did  not  attain  (according  to  the 
R.  V.  of  ver.  19,  end)  to  the  first  Three.  But  the  word  "  first "  does  not  appear 
in  the  original  of  this  latter  passage  ;  and  perhaps  "most  honourable  of  the 
Three"  should  be  corrected  into  "more  honourable  than  the  Thirty" 
(as  in  ver.  23).  In  /  Ch.  xl  20  one  reading  is  "he  (Abishai)  had  not  a  name 
amongst  the  Three." 

5.  The  king  not  only  possessed  supreme  control  over  the  army, 
but  was  also  in  person  the  highest  court  of  justice  in  his  realm. 
To  him  the  woman  of  Tekoa,  suborned  by  Joab,  made  her 
pretended  appeal  {2  Sam.  xiv.  4  foil.,  see  p.  263);  and  his  son 
Solomon  acted  as  judge  in  the  memorable  case  of  the  two  harlots 
(7  Kg.  iii.  16  foil).  But  the  number  of  suits  that  required 
decision  rendered  it  necessary  for  the  king  to  appoint  deputies 
(cf.  2  Sam.  XV.  3).  Ordinarily  in  the  provinces  the  administration 
of  justice  would  be  in  the  hands  of  the  elders  of  each  city,  in  ac- 
cordance with  traditional  usage  (see  i  Kg.  xxi.  8  foil.,  and  cf.  Deut. 
xix.  12).  Such  elders,  in  addition  to  discharging  judicial  functions, 
were,  in  the  unorganised  constitution  which  naturally  prevailed 
among  a  primitive  eastern  people,  the  usual  representatives  of 
the  nation ;  and  it  was  with  them  that  Abner  communicated  when 
promoting  David's  accession  to  the  throne  of  united  Israel,  and 
it  was  by  them  that  David  was  subsequently  elected  {2  Sam.  iii. 
17,  V.  3).  When  they  created  David  king,  they  are  recorded  to 
have  made  a  covenant  with  him  before  Jehovah,  such  a  covenant 
being  presumably  a  charter  of  rights  and  Uberties  to  which  the 
newly-elected  king  was  required  to  give  his  consent.  A  later 
occasion  showed  that  in  the  event  of  a  refusal,  the  people  were 
at  no  loss  for  a  way  to  manifest  their  resentment. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  will  be  evident  that  during  David's 
reign,  no  small  progress  was  accomplished  towards  the  formation 
of  a  well-ordered  kingdom.  In  the  country  districts  much  power 
was,  no  doubt,  still  left  to  the  heads  of  tribes  and  families.  But 
a  beginning  had  been  made  in  the  establishment  of  a  central 
authority  which  commanded  deference  not  only  by  the  material 
force  at  the  back  of  it,  but  by  the  splendour  of  a  court  which 
heightened  the  respect  exacted  by  the  personal  qualities  of  the 
king.     As   will   appear,  tribal  jealousies   and   a    native   love   of 


262  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

independence  were  not  eradicated  from  the  nation  as  a  whole. 
But  in  spite  of  sectional  dissensions  and  popular  outbreaks 
against  oppression,  the  subsequent  history  shows  no  revolt  against 
the  monarchical  principle ;  and  the  hold  which  it  obtained  upon 
the  people  must  be  attributed  in  part,  it  is  true,  to  the  exigencies 
of  the  nation's  situation,  but  in  part,  also,  to  the  character  and 
capacity  of  its  second  sovereign. 

The  latter  half  of  David's  reign  offers  a  striking  contrast  to 
the  earlier  half.  A  heinous  sin  on  the  part  of  the  king  himself 
was  the  beginning  of  a  series  of  crimes  and  calamities  within 
his  own  family.  During  the  Ammonite  war,  he  conceived  a 
passion  for  a  woman  named  Bathsheba,^  the  wife  of  one  of  his 
officers,  a  Hittite  called  Uriah.  When  he  was  made  aware  of 
the  consequences  of  its  indulgence,  he  sent  for  her  husband,  who 
was  serving  with  Joab,  and  urged  him  to  return  to  his  house  and 
his  wife;  but  on  his  excusing  himself,^  and  so  frustrating  the  hopes 
which  the  king  had  of  screening  his  fault,  David  dismissed  him 
to  his  duties,  with  a  letter  to  Joab  directing  him  to  place  Uriah 
in  a  post  of  danger  in  the  next  engagement.  The  command  was 
duly  carried  out.  Uriah  fell,  fighting  in  the  foremost  battle ;  and 
Bathsheba,  as  soon  as  the  customary  mourning  for  a  husband  was 
ended,  became  the  wife  of  her  royal  seducer.  The  deed,  how- 
ever, did  not  go  unreproved.  The  prophet  Nathan  at  once 
confronted  the  king,  awoke  his  slumbering  conscience  by  a 
parable,  drew  from  him  a  confession  of  his  guilt,  and  whilst 
declaring  that  his  repentance  was  accepted,  announced  that  the 
child  born  to  him  should  die.  The  event  confirmed  the  prophet's 
word ;  but  a  second  son,  to  whom  Bathsheba  subsequently  gave 
birth,  survived,  and  was  named  by  his  father  Solomon,  but  by 
Nathan  Jedidiah. 

The  example  of  uncontrolled  passion  set  by  the  king  was 
followed  by  his  eldest  son  Amnon.     Amnon  fell  in  love  with  his 

*  In  I  Ck.  iii.  5  Batk-shua ;  she  was  perhaps  granddaughter  of  Ahitophel, 
cf.  2  Sam.  xi.  3  with  xxiii.  34. 

2  The  reason  for  Uriah's  refusal  to  accede  to  the  king's  request  is  probably 
to  be  found  in  the  sanctity  attaching  to  warriors  in  the  field  (cf.  Is.  xiii.  3, 
Jer.  vi.  4  (marg.),  Joel  iii.  9  (marg.) ),  to  whom  cohabitation  with  their  wives 
was  presumably  forbidden ;  cf.  /  ^am.  xxi.  5. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  263 

half-sister  Tamar ;  and  having,  by  the  advice  of  Jonadab,  David's 
nephew,  got  her  into  his  power  by  feigning  illness  and  so  pro- 
curing her  attendance  upon  him,^  outraged  her.  But  instead  of 
repairing  the  wrong  by  marrying  her,^  he  was  base  enough,  as 
soon  as  his  passion  cooled,  to  drive  her  from  his  presence.  The 
king,  though  indignant  at  Amnon's  conduct,  took  no  steps  to 
punish  his  eldest,  and  consequently  his  favourite,^  son;  but 
Tamar  found  an  avenger  in  her  own  brother  Absalom.  The  latter 
nursed  his  grievance  for  two  years  ;  and  then  found  his  oppor- 
tunity at  a  sheap-shearing  festival,  held  at  Baal-hazor,*  to  which 
he  invited  Amnon  and  the  other  princes.  As  soon  as  Amnon 
became  heated  with  wine,  Absalom's  servants  rose  upon  him  and 
killed  him ;  and  the  gathering  broke  up  in  confusion.  The  first 
report  that  reached  David  represented  that  all  the  king's  sons 
had  perished  by  Absalom's  hand;  but  Jonadab,  who  knew  the 
provocation  that  the  latter  had  received,  suspected  the  truth,  and 
the  subsequent  arrival  of  all  the  princes  except  Amnon  con- 
firmed his  words.  Absalom,  having  thus  compassed  his  revenge, 
fled,  and  took  refuge  with  his  grandfather  Talmai,  king  of 
Geshur,5  with  whom  he  spent  three  years.  In  course  of  time, 
however,  David  began  to  regret  him ;  and  Joab,  perceiving  this, 
got  a  "wise  woman"  of  Tekoa  to  extract  from  the  king,  by 
means  of  a  feigned  petition,  expressions  which  committed  him 
to  the  recall  of  Absalom.  David  detected  Joab's  hand  in  the 
appeal;  but  he  consented  to  the  young  prince's  return  whilst 
excluding  him  from  his  presence.  Absalom  submitted  to  this 
for  two  years ;  but  then  put  force  on  Joab  to  induce  him  to  pro- 
cure for  him  a  reconciliation  with  the  king,  his  father. 

The  prince,  seeing  himself  restored  to  favour  and  his  eldest 
brother   removed   by  death,    now   began   to   cherish   ambitious 

^  In  2  Sam.  xiii.  there  is  some  inconsistency  between  ver.  9  and  10. 

*  From  2  Sam.  xiii.  13  it  would  appear  that  marriage  with  a  half-sister  was 
at  this  time  forbidden,  but  that  the  king  exercised  a  dispensing  power.  In 
patriarchal  times  such  unions  were  common ;  but  they  are  prohibited  in 
lev.  XX.  17. 

^  To  2  Sam.  xiii.  21  the  LXX.  adds  Kal  ovk  iXijirrjaev  rb  iruev/xa  'Afxvthv  toO 
vlov  avTov,  6ti  rjydTra  avrbv,  6tl  irpurdTOKOs  avroO  Tji/. 

*  The  locality  is  unknown,  but  the  Ephraim  near  which  it  was  situated  is 
perhaps  the  ^own  of  Ephrain  or  Ephron  in  Benjamin  named  in  2  Ch.  xiii.  19. 

^  See  p.  241,  note. 


264  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

schemes.  The  son  of  a  foreign  princess,  and  enjoying  the  popu- 
larity which  often  follows  great  personal  attractions  (among  which 
was  the  beauty  of  his  long  hair^),  he  proceeded  to  add  to  it 
by  sympathising  with  all  suitors  whose  efforts  to  obtain  justice 
met  with  delay,  consequent  upon  the  king  failing  to  appoint 
the  necessary  deputies  to  aid  him  in  his  judicial  functions.  His 
hints  of  the  beneficent  change  which  would  ensue  if  he  were 
judge,  and  his  grace  and  courtesy  towards  everyone  who 
approached  to  make  obeisance  to  him  won  all  hearts  ;2  and 
he  soon  assumed  something  hke  royal  state  {2  Sam,  xv.  i, 
cf.  I  Kg.  L  5,  and  see  i  Sam.  xxii.  17  marg.).  It  was  not 
however,  until  four  years  ^  had  passed  that  his  intrigues  came 
to  a  head.  Under  the  pretence  of  having  to  discharge  a  vow 
made  during  his  exile  he  obtained  leave  to  go  to  Hebron, 
accompanied  by  200  leading  men  of  Jerusalem  whom  he  invited 
as  his  guests,  but  probably  intended  to  hold  as  hostages  for 
the  support  or  neutrality  of  their  friends  in  the  capital;  and 
at  Hebron  he  got  himself  proclaimed  king.  His  emissaries  had 
been  actively  at  work  throughout  the  nation,  preparing  the 
people  for  a  change  of  sovereign ;  and  as  soon  as  the  standard 
of  rebellion  was  raised,  supporters  rapidly  flocked  to  it  It 
may  be  conjectured  that  the  strength  of  the  movement  in  favour 
of  Absalom  lay  in  the  still-smouldering  embers  of  tribal  jealousy. 
By  the  removal  of  the  court  to  Jerusalem,  Judah  had  lost  some- 
thing of  the  prestige  which,  from  its  connection  with  the  king, 
it  might  have  looked  to  enjoy.  There  were,  besides,  some  in 
Israel  who  had  not  yet  forgotten  Saul,  and  who  regarded  David 
as  a  usurper.  Probably,  too,  the  complaints  made  respecting 
the  administration  of  justice,  of  which  Absalom  had  taken 
advantage,  were  not  groundless ;  for  the  many  foreign  wars 
in  which  David  had  engaged  may  well  have  distracted  his 
attention  from  the  internal  affairs  of  the  kingdom,  during  the 

^  The  weight  of  a  year*s  growth  of  it  is  said  to  have  been  200  shekels 
(more  than  6  lbs. ). 

2  The  Heb.  phrase  (2  Sam.  xv.  6)  stole  the  hearts  of  the  men  of  Israel  else 
where  means  deceived  (see  Gen.  xxxi.  20  marg.) ;  but  the  LXX.  here  renders 
Ihior (Hiiro  TT]v  Kapdiav. 

•  2  Sam.  XV.  7  states  fortjf,  which  is  manifestly  improbable.  Josephus 
{Ant.  vii.  9,  I)  giwQS  four. 


THE   REIGN   OF   DAVID  265 

early  part  of  his  reign,  whilst  now  that  peace  prevailed,  he  was 
beginning  to  feel  the  weight  of  years.  There  may,  again,  have 
been  some  who  disliked  the  introduction  into  the  nation  of  the 
luxurious  habits  which  the  king,  after  the  fashion  of  other 
Oriental  monarchs,  had  seen  fit  to  adopt;  or  who  dreaded  the 
tendency  to  tyranny  which  he  had  displayed  in  the  matter  of 
Uriah.  Ahitophel  the  Gilonite,^  in  particular  (who  was  summoned 
by  Absalom  to  join  him  at  Hebron),  if  he  was  the  grandfather  of 
Bathsheba,2may  have  resented  her  seduction,  notwithstanding 
the  honour  to  which  it  paved  the  way.  There  were  thus  many 
motives  for  discontent  existent ;  and  by  working  upon  them  by 
means  of  his  agents,  Absalom  was  enabled  to  place  the  king  in  a 
position  of  the  greatest  danger. 

The  conspiracy  was  the  more  alarming  from  the  secrecy  with 
which  the  preparations  for  it  had  been  conducted  (see  2  Sam. 
XV.  11).  As  soon  as  the  news  reached  Jerusalem,  David,  fearing 
a  sudden  attack,  and  having  only  a  small  force  in  the  capital, 
saw  no  hope  but  in  flight.  He  was  accompanied  by  his  house- 
hold (with  the  exception  of  ten  concubines),  and  by  his  Philistine 
body-guard  of  600,  together  with  Joab  and  Abishai.  A  Gittite 
chief  named  Ittai,  who  had  recently  attached  himself  to  David, 
also  remained  faithful  to  the  monarch's  fallen  fortunes;  and 
when  the  king  reviewed  his  followers  at  a  place  called  Beth- 
merhak  (perhaps  a  locality  in  the  suburbs  of  the  capital), 
persisted  in  sharing  in  his  withdrawal,  in  spite  of  remonstrances. 
The  Levites,  with  Zadok  at  their  head,  also  came,  bringing  with 
them  the  Ark  of  Jehovah  (probably  as  a  kind  of  palladium)^ 
and  proposed  to  accompany  David  with  it ;  whilst  Abiathar,  who 
likewise  attended,  offered  sacrifices^  as  the  royal  escort  was 
evacuating  the  city.  But  the  king  would  not  permit  tbe  priests 
with  the  Ark  to  join  him,  partly  from  pious  motives  (believing 
that  if  he  found  favour  in  Jehovah's  sight  he  would  be  restored 
to  Jerusalem  and  to  the  sanctuary),  and  partly  from  prudential 
reasons ;  for  the  presence  of  the  priests  in  Jerusalem  would 
enable  him  to  obtain  information  of  Absalom's  designs,  when 

^  Giloh  was  in  Judah  {/osk.  xv.  51).  "^  Ci.  2  Sam.  xxiii.  34  with  xi.  3. 

^  In  -?  Satn,  xv.  24  Abiathar  went  up  should  probably  be  Abiathat 
sacrificed. 


266  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  city  fell  into  his  hands.  The  direction  of  the  retreat  was 
over  the  mount  of  Olives  towards  the  Arabah  and  the  Jordan. 
The  melancholy  procession  was  met  on  the  mount  by  a  devoted 
servant  of  the  king's,  named  Hushai,  an  Archite,^  who  was 
directed  to  remain  at  Jerusalem  and  gain  the  confidence  of 
Absalom,  with  a  view  to  communicating  his  plans  to  David 
through  the  priests  Zadok  and  Abiathar.  Ziba,  the  servant  of 
Meribbaal  (Mephibosheth),  also  came  to  meet  the  fugitives  with 
refreshments  for  the  king  and  his  train,  representing,  in  answer 
to  David's  enquiries,  that  his  master  Meribbaal  had  remained 
behind  in  hope  of  regaining  his  father's  throne.  On  hearing  this, 
David  still  felt  himself  king  enough  to  order  the  confiscation  of 
Meribbaal's  property,  which  he  bestowed  on  Ziba.  At  Bahurim, 
on  the  road  from  Jerusalem  to  the  Jordan  fords,  a  man  called 
Shimei,  connected  with  the  family  of  Saul,  cursed  David,  and 
reproached  him  with  the  blood  of  Saul's  house  spilled  by 
him  (alluding  doubtless  to  the  executions  demanded  by  the 
Gibeonites).  The  king  submitted  patiently  to  all  his  insults, 
and  prevented  Abishai  from  avenging  them  as  he  sought  to  do. 
The  dispirited  company  finally  reached  a  place  called  Ayephmi,^ 
where  they  rested. 

After  the  departure  of  David  from  Jerusalem,  the  city  was 
entered  by  Absalom.  Hushai  offered  his  services,  which 
Absalom,  though  not  v/ithout  a  sneer,  accepted.  Ahitophel  then 
advised  that  Absalom  should  assume  that  the  throne  had  been 
vacated  by  David's  flight,  and  should  act  as  his  successor  by 
taking  possesion  of  the  concubines^  who  had  been  left  behind. 
The  breach  between  him  and  his  father  would  then  be  com- 
plete, and  his  sympathisers  would  feel  that  they  were  committed 
to  rebellion,  and  therefore  could  only  secure  their  own  safety  by 
bringing  it  to  a  successful  issue  {2  Sam.  xvi.  21).  Absalom  acted 
on  the  advice,  and  was  subsequently  anointed  king  (see  2  Sam. 
xix.   10). 

On  the  question  of  pursuing  the  fugitive  monarch  opinions 

^  The  Archites  lived  on  the  southern  border  of  Ephraim  {Josh.  xvi.  2). 

"^  It  is  possible,  however,  that  this  word  is  an  adjective  meaning  exhausted 
(LXX.  (KKiKv^hoi),  and  that  the  name  of  the  place  (which  must  then  be  the 
Bahurim  of  xvi.  5)  is  omitted. 

*  CL  2  6am.  xii,  8. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  267 

were  divided.  Ahitophel  urged  that  he  should  be  followed  at 
once,  and  overtaken  before  he  and  his  supporters  had  recovered 
from  the  distress  and  despondency  of  the  retreat;  and  offered 
himself  to  conduct  the  expedition,  if  a  force  of  12,000  were  placed 
at  his  service,  asserting  that  he  would  bring  back  the  people  to 
Absalom  like  a  bride  to  her  husband.^  But  Hushai  objected 
that  an  encounter  (possibly  under  disadvantageous  circumstances) 
with  a  body  of  desperate  men,  commanded  by  so  redoubtable  a 
warrior  as  David,  involved  too  great  a  risk  at  a  moment  when 
Absalom  was  not  yet  securely  seated  on  the  throne.  He  there- 
fore advised  that  an  offensive  movement  should  not  be  made 
until  a  general  levy  could  be  held,  and  a  force  got  together 
which  would  overcome  all  resistance.  The  counsel  of  Hushai 
prevailed,  and  Ahitophel,  seeing  in  the  rejection  of  his  proposal 
the  ultimate  ruin  of  Absalom's  cause,  forestalled  disaster  by  taking 
his  own  life. 

Meanwhile  Hushai,  fearful  lest  second  thoughts  might  show 
Absalom  the  wisdom  of  Ahitophel's  advice,  and  the  king  be 
surprised  before  he  could  gather  a  force  round  him,  sent  a 
message  to  him,  pressing  upon  him  the  necessity  of  placing  the 
Jordan  between  him  and  his  enemies.  The  messengers  had  a 
narrow  escape  of  being  detected.  They  had  stayed  at  En-rogel 
("Job's,"  or  "Joab's  well,"  in  the  valley  S.  of  Jerusalem) ^  in  order 
not  to  excite  suspicion  by  returning  to  the  city  after  having  been 
seen  in  David's  train  (xv.  27).  But  their  presence  there  had 
been  reported  to  Absalom,  and  they  only  avoided  capture  by 
conceaHng  themselves  in  a  well,  over  the  top  of  which  a  woman 
scattered  bruised  corn,  as  though  for  drying.  Having  thus 
evaded  the  danger  of  arrest,  they  reached  the  king  safely ;  who 
acted  at  once  upon  the  counsel  conveyed  by  them.  He  crossed 
the  river,  and  established  himself  at  Mahanaim.  There  he  re- 
ceived supplies  from  Gileadites  like  Barzillai  and  Machir,^  and 

^  So  the  LXX.  in  2  Sam.  xvii.  3  for  the  unintelligible  the  man  whom  thou 
seekest  is  as  if  all  returned. 

2  En-rogel '\%  identified  by  many  with  *'  the  Virgin's  fountain"  in  the  valley 
of  the  Kidron.  This,  however,  is  most  probably  Gihon  {2  Ch.  xxxii.  30, 
cf.  p.  301) ;  and  as  Gihon  and  En-rogcl  were  distinct  (see  i  Kg.  i.  9,  38,  41), 
the  latter  must  be  placed  elsewhere.  The  chief  objection  to  its  identification 
with  Joab's  well  is  that  this  is  said  to  be  really  a  well  and  not  a  spring. 

'  Cf.  2  Sam.  ix.  4. 


268  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

from  an  Ammonite  chief  Shobi,  the  son  of  Nahash,  and  brother 
and  perhaps  rival  of  Hanun ;  and  gradually  an  army  gathered 
round  him,  which  he  divided  into  three  divisions  commanded  by 
Joab,  Abishai,  and  Ittai. 

At  length  Absalom  thought  himself  strong  enough  to  take  the 
field;  and  he  accordingly  crossed  the  Jordan  and  occupied  a 
position  confronting  David's  forces  at  Mahanaim,  his  army  being 
under  the  command  of  Amasa,  a  man  who  was  of  Ishmaelite 
extraction  on  his  father's  side  {i  Ch.  ii.  17),  but  on  his  mother's 
side  related  both  to  Joab  and  to  David  {2  Sam.  xvii.  25,  xix.  13). 
There  he  was  attacked  by  David's  troops,  the  king  himself,  at 
the  request  of  his  men,  remaining  with  the  reserves  in  the  city. 
As  his  army  issued  forth  to  battle,  David  gave  his  three  generals 
strict  injunctions  to  spare  Absalom,  if  the  fortune  of  the  day  put 
him  at  their  mercy.  The  engagement  took  place  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  a  wood  called  the  Forest  of  Ephraim  (which  is  not 
otherwise  known)  ;^  and  resulted  in  the  total  defeat  of  Absalom's 
army,  20,000  men  (it  is  said)  being  slain.  The  pursuit  was  con- 
tinued through  the  forest  where  large  numbers  perished.  Among 
the  fugitives  was  Absalom  himself,  whose  head,  as  he  rode  on  his 
mule,  became  entangled  in  the  boughs  of  a  terebinth,  and  he  was 
left  suspended.  His  helpless  condition  was  observed  and  re- 
ported by  one  of  the  king's  guards  to  Joab,  who,  notwithstanding 
the  orders  he  had  received  to  spare  Absalom's  life,  at  once  killed 
him.  2  Over  his  body  was  piled  a  heap  of  stones  which  ser\'ed  to 
mark  his  grave,  though  his  name  was  likewise  associated  with 
another  monument,  a  pillar  which  he  erected  during  his  lifetime 
in  a  place  called  the  King's  Dale,  to  keep  his  memory  alive,  since 
his  three  sons  died  in  infancy  (2  Sam.  xiv.  27,  xviii.  18),  and  only 
a  daughter,  Tamar,  was  left  to  survive  him.^  After  Absalom's 
death  the  royal  forces  were  recalled  from  the  pursuit;  and  the 
residue  of  the  rebel  army  dispersed  to  their  homes.     Tidings  of 

^  Some  for  Ephraim  have  conjectured  Mahanaim. 

'  There  seems  to  be  some  inconsistency  between  2  Sam.  xviii.  14,  which 
represents  Absalom  as  slain  by  Joab  himself,  and  ver.  15  which  states  that  he 
was  killed  by  ten  of  Joab's  guard. 

'  Tamar's  daughter  Maacah  became  the  mother  of  King  Abijah  (/  Kg, 
XV.  2,  where  daughter  of  Abishalom  stands  for  granddaughter  of  Abishalom 
{Absalom) ). 


THE   REIGN   OF   DAVID  269 

his  son's  end  were  carried  to  David  at  Mahanaim  by  Ahimaaz  the 
son  of  Zadok,!  and  a  certain  Ethiopian;  and  his  distress  was  so 
great  that  the  conquering  troops,  instead  of  returning  in  triumph, 
slunk  into  the  city  like  beaten  men.  It  was  not  until  Joab 
addressed  the  king  in  tones  of  threatening  remonstrance  that  he 
roused  himself  from  his  grief  and  bore  himself  gratefully  towards 
those  whose  loyalty  had  stood  between  him  and  the  sword  of  his 
unworthy  son. 

The  result  of  the  battle  brought  about  a  revulsion  of  feeling 
amongst  the  people  in  favour  of  the  injured  king;  and  a  wide- 
spread desire  was  manifested  for  his  return.  The  tribe  of  Judah, 
which  had  been  foremost  in  the  revolt,  was  naturally  most  back- 
ward in  the  movement  for  David's  restoration.  But  the  king,  who 
had  got  wind  of  the  altered  sentiments  of  the  nation  at  large,^ 
appealed  skilfully,  through  the  priests  Zadok  and  Abiathar,  to  the 
ties  which  subsisted  between  him  and  his  fellow-tribesmen  ;  whilst 
to  Amasa,  Absalom's  general,  he  not  only  offered  pardon  but 
promotion,  promising  to  make  him  captain  of  the  host  in  the 
room  of  Joab,  whose  recent  disregard  of  his  wishes  he  bitterly 
resented.  These  approaches  were  successful;  and  the  men  of 
Judah,  without  waiting  for  the  rest  of  the  tribes  to  join  them,  went 
down  to  Gilgal  to  bring  the  king  over  Jordan.  They  were  ac- 
companied by  1,000  Benjamites,  together  with  Shimei  and  Ziba, 
the  former  of  whom  entreated  forgiveness  for  his  previous  conduct, 
which  David,  in  spite  of  the  protest  of  Abishai,  granted.  Merib- 
baal  also  came  down  among  the  concourse  from  Jerusalem,^  to 
meet  the  king,  and  defended  himself  against  the  representations 
of  Ziba,  alleging  that  his  failure  to  accompany  the  king  in  his 
flight  was  due  to  his  helplessness.  But  he  seemingly  only  partly 
convinced  David  that  he  had  been  slandered,  for  the  latter, 
instead  of  restoring  to  him  the  whole  of  his  property  and  punish- 
ing Ziba,  curtly  directed  that  it  should  be  divided  between  them. 
Nor  whilst  pardoning  his  enemies,  did  the  king  forget  his  friends ; 

*  Ahimaaz  is  said  to  have  run  by  the  way  of  the  Plairiy  i.e.  the  valley,  or 
Circle,  of  the  Jordan  {Gen.  xiii.  lo),  which  perhaps  offered  an  easier,  though 
presumably  longer,  road  than  the  wooded  hills  traversed  by  the  Ethiopian. 

2  After  2  Sam.  xix.  lo  the  LXX.  adds  koX  rb  prjfia  raprbs  IcrpaTjX  ^XOev 
■Trpbi  Tov  /SacrtX^a. 

'  3  Sam.  xix.  25  marg. 


270  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

for  he  wished  to  take  with  him  to  his  court  the  Gileadite  Barzillai, 
who  had  supported  him  so  generously  at  Mahanaim.  Barzillai, 
however,  excused  himself  on  the  ground  of  his  age  from  going 
further  than  the  Jordan,  though  he  accepted  the  king's  proffered 
kindness  for  his  son  Chimham.^  At  the  Jordan  David  was  met 
by  the  men  of  Judah  and  such  of  the  remaining  Israelites  who 
could  reach  the  spot  in  time;  and  by  them  he  was  escorted 
to  Jerusalem.  There  one  of  his  first  actions  was  to  seclude  the 
ten  concubines  whom  Absalom  had  treated  as  his  own ;  and  they 
lived  the  rest  of  their  lives  in  widowhood. 

The  proposal  to  bring  back  the  king  did  not  (as  has  been  seen) 
originate  with  Judah;  and  when  that  tribe  thus  stole  a  march 
upon  the  rest  of  the  nation  by  being  the  first  to  welcome  David, 
much  indignation  was  excited,  and  it  was  implied  that  its  conduct 
was  dictated  by  the  hope  of  obtaining  exceptional  favours  from 
him.  And  so  fierce  were  the  passions  generated  in  the  dispute 
that  it  culminated  in  a  second  rebellion,  a  Benjamite,  called 
Sheba,  the  son  of  Bichri,  from  mount  Ephraim,^  appealing  suc- 
cessfully to  the  remaining  tribes  to  unite  in  a  demonstration  against 
Judah.  But  prompt  steps  were  taken  by  David  to  suppress  the 
rising.  As  soon  as  he  reached  Jerusalem,  he  directed  Amasa  (as 
the  newly-appointed  captain  of  the  host)  to  collect  a  force  from 
Judah  within  three  days.  As  he  failed,  however,  to  appear  by 
the  time  named,  Abishai,  in  order  to  prevent  Sheba  from  en- 
trenching himself  in  a  fortress,  was  ordered  to  pursue  him  with 
a  body  of  household  troops,  his  brother  Joab  joining  him  with 
a  company  of  soldiers  who  were  attached  to  him.  At  Gibeon, 
on  their  march  northward,  they  were  (seemingly)  overtaken  by 
Amasa ;  and  Joab  seized  the  opportunity  treacherously  to  assassi- 
nate his  supplanter.2  Continuing  the  pursuit,  the  two  brothers 
came  up  with  Sheba  at  Abel-beth-maacah,  or  Abel-maim  {2  Ch. 
xvi.   4),  a  city  not  far  from  Dan,  into  which  he  had  thrown 

1  Ci.Jer.  xli.  17. 

2  The  Benjamite  Shimei  also  associated  himself  with  the  tribe  of  Joseph 
{2  Sam.  xix.  20). 

^  The  passage  {2  Sam.  xx.  8-10)  describing  how  Joab  killed  Amasa  is 
obscure :  it  would  seem  that  the  former  allowed  his  sword  to  drop  from  its 
sheath  in  order  to  disarm  his  enemy's  suspicions,  but  had  another  weapon 
concealed,  with  which  he  smote  Amasa  whilst  saluting  him. 


THE   REIGN   OF  DAVID  271 

himself  with  his  fellow-clansmen, ^  and  where  he  was  besieged. 
The  citizens  saved  their  town  by  delivering,  at  the  suggestion 
of  a  woman,  the  rebel's  head  to  Joab ;  and  the  revolt  which  seems 
to  have  had  little  support  behind  it  at  once  came  to  an  end. 

This  was  the  last  of  the  civil  commotions  which  necessitated 
an  appeal  to  arms;  and  the  only  other  disquietude  which  dis- 
turbed the  monarch's  declining  days  arose  from  palace  cabals. 
David  was  now  old  and  infirm ;  and  as  his  feebleness  increased, 
a  young  woman  was  obtained  to  nurse  him,  Abishag  of  Shunem. 
The  near  prospect  of  his  death  made  the  question  of  the  suc- 
cession pressing ;  and  a  strong  party,  including  Joab  and  Abiathar, 
was  formed  to  further  the  claims  of  Adonijah,  who,  in  the  order 
of  David's  family,  came  next  to  Absalom,^  and  like  him 'was 
possessed  of  great  personal  beauty  {i  Kg.  i.  6),  and  had  been 
indulgently  treated  by  his  father.  But  the  indefeasible  right  of 
the  eldest  son  to  succeed  to  the  throne  was  not  yet  a  recognised 
principle  in  Israel.  The  reigning  sovereign  had  it  in  his  power 
to  nominate  his  successor  (z  Kg.  i.  20) ;  and  a  counter-intrigue 
was  immediately  set  on  foot  to  procure  from  the  king  a  decision 
in  favour  of  Bathsheba's  son  Solomon.  Adonijah  had  already 
surrounded  himself  with  a  body-guard  {i  Kg,  i.  5,  cf.  2  Sam. 
XV.  i);  and  he  next  proceeded  to  summon  his  followers  (includ- 
ing all  the  royal  princes  except  Solomon)  to  a  sacrificial  feast 
near  En-rogel  (the  modern  Bir-eyub\  at  which  he  might  be 
proclaimed  king.  Zadok  the  second  priest,^  Nathan  the  prophet, 
Benaiah,  and  others,  were  not  favourable  to  his  pretensions ;  and 
Nathan  took  the  opportunity,  whilst  Adonijah  was  at  En-rogel, 
to  urge  Bathsheba  to  extract  from  the  king  a  confirmation  of 
a  promise  he  had  made  that  Solomon  should  be  his  successor. 
Adonijah's  assumption  of  authority  (skilfully  dwelt  upon  by 
Bathsheba,  in  an  interview  with  the  king,  and  by  Nathan  who 
followed  her  into  the  royal  presence)  provoked  the  aged  David 
not  only  to  ratify  his  promise,  but  to  take  immediate  steps  to 
carry  it  into  effect.     Zadok,  Nathan,  and  Benaiah  were  commis- 

^  The  text  of  2  Sam.  xx.  14  has  the  BeriteSy  but  a  plausible  conjecture  is 
the  Bichrites. 

2  Chileab,  David's  second  son  (Amnon  being  the  eldest),  had  presumably 
died  before  this, 

8  See  the  LXX.  of  /  Kg.  ii.  35,  and  cf.  2  Kg.  xxv.  18. 


272  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

sioned  to  take  Solomon  to  Gihon  (the  modern  Vtrgin^s  Sprtng\ 
and  there  anoint  him  king ;  and  afterwards  to  bring  him  to 
Jerusalem  and  place  him  on  the  throne.  The  commands  were 
carried  out.  With  the  horn  of  consecrated  oil  from  the  Tent  of 
Jehovah^  Solomon  was  anointed,  and  then  publicly  proclaimed 
king.  The  noise  of  the  shouting  people  reached  the  ears  of 
the  feasters  at  En-rogel,  who  at  once  dispersed  in  alarm.  Adonijah 
himself  took  refuge  at  the  Altar,  which  he  refused  to  leave  until 
he  obtained  a  promise  from  Solomon,  who  was  recognised  as 
already  invested  with  full  powers,  that  his  life  would  be  spared. 
This  Solomon  granted,  and  dismissed  him  to  his  house  (/  Kg, 

i-  50-53)- 

David's  end  was  now  at  hand ;  and  before  dying  he  gave  a  last 
charge  to  his  successor.  It  was  of  a  sufficiently  vindictive  char- 
acter; for  both  Joab  and  Shimei  were  directed  to  be  put  to 
death,  the  former  for  his  murders  of  Abner  and  Amasa,^  the 
latter  for  his  insults  on  the  occasion  of  the  flight  from  Jerusalem. 
On  the  other  hand  the  sons  of  Barzillai  were  commended  to 
Solomon's  care,  in  gratitude  for  the  kindness  David  had  received 
in  his  time  of  need  from  their  father.  The  king  passed  away 
soon  after  this  at  the  age  of  seventy  (2  Sam.  v.  4-5),  having 
reigned  a  little  over  forty  years  (seven  and  a  half  at  Hebron  and 
thirty-three  in  Jerusalem),  and  was  buried  in  his  own  capital. 

In  2  Sam.  xxiii.  1-7  a  short  Psalm  is  inserted  which  is  styled  "the  last 
words  of  David."  There  is  nothing  in  the  subject-matter  seriously  at  vari- 
ance with  the  alleged  authorship  (though  it  is  in  no  sense  a  death-bed 
utterance) ;  but  in  the  introductory  verse  David  is  described  objectively  as 
**  pleasant  in  (or  the  favourite  of)  the  psalms  of  Israel,"  which  suggests  that 
the  ascription  of  the  psalm  to  him  may  be  a  literary  device,  his  position  and 
character  making  him  seem  an  appropriate  exponent  of  the  sentiments  which 
the  writer  desired  to  express. 

The  importance  of  David's  reign  in  the  history  of  Israel  and, 
indirectly,  of  the  world  cannot  be  over-estimated.  Under  him 
Israel  finally  passed  from  the  tribal  into  the  national  phase  of 
existence.  The  work  which  Saul  had  initiated  was  shattered  by 
a  foreign  invasion  with  which  he  was  unable  to  cope ;  and  it  had 

^  According  to  Ex.  xxx.  22-33  (P)  the  only  persons  upon  whom  the  holy 
anointing  oil,  kept  in  the  Tent  of  Meeting,  might  be  poured  were  the  sons  of 
Aaron. 

'^  In  /  Kg.  ii.  5,  for  the  blood  of  war  LXX.  A  has  at^M.  ddi^ov. 


THE   REIGN   OF   DAVID  273 

to  be  done  again.  David  accomplished  this,  and  more.  From 
the  depressed  and  humbled  condition  in  which  the  country  found 
itself  at  Saul's  death  it  was  raised  to  a  position  of  supremacy 
over  its  immediate  neighbours;  and  began  to  take  a  place 
amongst  the  powers  of  the  Eastern  world.  The  external  con- 
ditions were  thereby  assured  which  were  necessary  to  the  pro- 
tection and  growth  of  those  aptitudes  which  have  specially 
distinguished  Israel  amongst  the  nations  of  mankind;  and  the 
Hebrew  state  being  thus  enabled  to  stand  the  shocks  of  fortune 
for  a  considerable  period,  the  Hebrew  religion  had  time  enough 
to  attain  its  true  development. 

This  result  was  achieved  by  David  in  consequence  partly  of  his 
military  genius  and  partly  of  his  religious  enthusiasm.  Of  his 
prowess  as  a  soldier  and  conduct  as  a  general  his  almost  un- 
chequered  success  is  proof.  His  prudence  under  difficult  circum- 
stances and  his  resourcefulness  in  times  of  stress  find  repeated 
illustration  in  the  course  of  his  career  {i  Sam.  xviii.  14,  xxviii.  2, 
2  Sam.  XV.  34,  xix.  11  foil).  In  his  warlike  operations  he  was 
aided  by  a  number  of  able  officers  like  Joab,  Abishai,  and 
Benaiah;  and  in  this  connection  mention  ought  to  be  made  of 
Abner,  for  though  he  did  not  live  to  serve  under  David,  he  must 
have  done  much,  by  fighting  for  Eshbaal  (Ishbosheth)  against 
the  PhiHstines,  to  facilitate  David's  subsequent  task.  But  the 
after-history  of  Israel  might,  humanly  speaking,  have  been  quite 
other  than  it  was,  had  not  the  extension  and  consolidation  of  the 
kingdom  been  effected  by  one  who  was  in  close  sympathy  with 
all  that  was  best  in  the  religion  of  his  age.  David  gave  to  his 
people  not  only  the  stability  essential  to  national  progress,  but 
also  a  strong  stimulus  in  the  right  direction.  In  this  he  stood  in 
marked  contrast  to  Saul.  His  relations  with  the  prophets  Nathan 
and  Gad  were  very  different  from  those  subsisting  between  Saul 
and  Samuel.  David's  frank  submission  to  Nathan's  unflinching 
rebuke  of  his  adultery  with  Bathsheba  must  have  been  of  incal- 
culable value  to  his  subjects  by  its  overt  acknowledgment  of  the 
supremacy  of  Jehovah's  law  over  the  arbitrary  will  of  the  sovereign 
himself.  And  even  such  external  service  to  God  as  David  ren- 
dered by  collecting  materials  for  the  Temple  promoted,  in  its 
degree,  the  progress  of  a  spiritual  faith.  How  much  the  Temple, 
I 


2/4  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

erected  after  his  death,  contributed  to  the  maintenance  and  pre- 
servation of  the  Hebrew  religion  will  be  considered  later;  but 
whatever  its  worth  in  this  respect,  the  credit  of  it  belongs  almost 
as  much  to  David  as  to  his  son. 

That  David  shared  many  of  the  faults  of  his  own  age  is  as 
evident  as  is  the  fact  that  in  many  ways  he  displayed  virtues  rare 
in  any  age.  His  gross  immorality  and  tyranny  in  the  matter  of 
Bathsheba  and  Uriah,  his  cruel  treatment  of  defeated  enemies 
(who,  however,  generally  met  with  scant  consideration  in  anti- 
quity), his  duplicity  towards  Shimei,  and  his  ingratitude  to  Joab 
(who,  in  spite  of  his  insubordination  and  bloodguiltiness,  had 
rendered  him  invaluable  service),  leave  deep  stains  upon  his 
memory.  There  is,  too,  more  than  a  suspicion  of  feebleness  in 
his  administration  of  justice,  in  spite  of  the  encomium  upon  him 
in  2  Sa??i.  viii.  15.  As  a  father  he  was  led  by  paternal  tenderness 
to  be  too  indulgent;  and  many  of  the  troubles  of  his  later  life 
are  traceable  to  his  leniency  towards  his  headstrong  and  worthless 
sons.  But  these  defects  were  counterbalanced  by  many  noble 
qualities.  His  loyalty  to  Saul,  even  when  the  latter  was  bent  on 
his  destruction,  his  anxious  solicitude  for  the  rebelUous  Absalom, 
his  kindness  to  Meribbaal  (Mephibosheth),  his  thoughtfulness  for 
Ittai  {2  Sa?n.  xv.  19-20),  his  gratitude  to  Barzillai,  and  his 
generous  recognition  of  the  valour  of  Abner,  though  this  must 
have  been  often  displayed  against  himself,  are  traits  which 
combine  to  make  the  character  of  David,  in  spite  of  his  numerous 
faults  and  his  great  fall,  a  singularly  attractive  one.  The  devotion 
he  could  inspire  in  his  followers  is  evidenced  by  more  than  one 
striking  story  (see  i  Sam.  xviii.  16,  2  Sam.  iii.  36,  xv.  21,  xviii.  3, 
xxi.  17,  xxiii.  13-17).  And  the  episode  of  his  friendship  with 
Jonathan,  as  it  forms  one  of  the  most  touching  narratives  in  the 
O.T.,  perhaps  also  puts  David  in  as  favourable  a  light  as  anything 
else  related  of  him ;  for  if  it  reflects  lustre  upon  Saul's  son,  who 
could  so  love  the  man  who  was  to  supplant  him,  it  is  likewise 
strong  testimony  to  the  worth  of  him  who  could  awaken  that 
love. 

The  general  condition  of  religion  prevalent  in  the  nation  in  the 
time  of  David  will  come  under  review  in  the  following  chapter : 
here  it  is  only  necessary  to  note  the  religious  disposition  of  the 


THE   REIGN    OF   DAVID  275 

king  himself.  The  account  of  the  removal  of  the  Ark  from  the 
house  of  Obed-edom  to  Jerusalem  testifies  to  the  sensuousness 
which  entered  into  David's  ideas  of  religion  in  common  with 
those  of  his  countrymen  in  general;  yet  such  sensuous  ideas 
respecting  the  Deity  and  the  worthiest  way  of  honouring  Him 
were  not  incompatible  with  spiritual  feelings  of  a  high  order. 
His  reply  to  his  wife  Michal,  when  she  taunted  him  with  dancing 
nakedly  before  the  Ark,  is  imbued  with  so  real  and  profound  a 
spirit  of  humility  and  devotion  that  the  rude  character  of  the 
scene  is  lost  sight  of  (2  Sam.  vi.  21,  22).  His  penitence  under 
the  reproof  of  Nathan  on  the  occasion  of  his  sin  with  Bathsheba 
(2  Sam.  xii.  13)  evinces  the  essential  nobility  of  his  nature  in 
spite  of  the  victories  of  passion.  His  prayerful  attitude  when  his 
child  was  sick  (xii.  16  foil.),  his  resignation  when  a  fugitive  before 
Absalom  (xv.  25,  26),  his  faith  in  the  Divine  mercy  when  (accord- 
ing to  the  narrative)  he  had  to  choose  between  the  chastisements 
to  be  inflicted  on  him  (xxiv.  14),  and  his  tender  appeal  that  the 
people  might  not  be  made  to  suffer  for  his  fault  (xxiv.  17),  all 
show  that  David,  whilst  certainly  a  sinner,  had  also  in  him  some- 
thing of  the  saint.  The  character  which  was  attributed  to  him  in 
later  times  was,  no  doubt,  largely  idealised;  but  the  most  trust- 
worthy records  of  his  life  make  it  clear  that  the  portrait,  though 
embellished,  was  not  wholly  a  work  of  imagination. 

David  possessed,  in  addition  to  great  military  and  political 
capacity,  much  skill  as  a  musician  and  poet.  It  was  because 
he  was  a  cunning  player  upon  the  harp  that  he  was  first  intro- 
duced to  Saul's  notice  (z  Sam.  xvi.  18);  and  the  prophet  Amos 
ascribes  to  him  the  devising  of  instruments  of  music  (Am.  vi.  5, 
cf.  I  Ch.  xxiii.  5,  Nth.  xii.  36).  Two  of  his  elegies,  one  on  the 
death  of  Saul  and  Jonathan  {2  Sam.  i.  19  foil),  and  the  other 
(seemingly  a  fragment  only)  on  that  of  Abner  {2  Sam.  iii.  33-34), 
are  preserved ;  and  the  first  of  them  is  remarkable  for  its  depth 
of  feeling  and  delicacy  of  phrase.  In  2  Sam.  tAvo  psalms  are  also 
attributed  to  him.  One  of  these  {2  Sa?n.  xxiii.  1-7)  has  already 
been  considered;  whilst  the  second  {2  Sam.  xxii.  2  foil.)  is  iden- 
tical (some  unimportant  variations  apart)  with  Fs.  xviii.,  and  the 
question  of  its  authorship  falls  within  the  wider  subject  of  the 
origin  of  the  73  Psalms  in  the  Psalter  which  bear  David's  name. 


276  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

It  has  been  shown  in  the  Introduction  that  certain  of  these  Psalms, 
notwithstanding  the  evidence  suppUed  by  their  titles,  can  hardly 
be  the  work  of  David.  But  with  regard  to  the  authorship  of  the 
rest,  two  conflicting  considerations  stand  in  the  way  of  a  positive 
conclusion  for  or  against  a  Davidic  origin,  viz.  on  the  one  hand 
the  applicability  to  numerous  other  people  of  such  parts  of  their 
contents  as  are  consistent  with  his  character;  and  on  the  other 
the  possibility,  where  isolated  allusions  occur  to  late  conditions 
inconsistent  with  his  situation,  of  these  being  additions  subse- 
quently introduced.  It  is,  in  short,  equally  difficult  to  deny  the 
probability  that  David  wrote  some  of  the  Psalms  and  to  decide 
confidently  that  he  was  the  writer  of  any  particular  psalm.  In 
view  of  his  religious  fervour,  the  presumption  that  he  devoted  his 
poetic  skill  (attested  by  his  elegies)  to  religious  purposes  is  strong ; 
and  the  popular  assignment  to  him  of  so  much  religious  poetry 
doubtless  rests  on  some  solid  basis  of  fact ;  but  it  is  impossible 
to  determine  in  detail  what  proportion  of  this  body  of  verse  is 
really  his  work. 

In  /  Ch.  xvi.  parts  of  three  psalms,  viz.  Ps.  cv.  1-15,  xcvi.  I-I3a,  and  cvi. 

47,  48,  though  not  expressly  ascribed  to  David's  authorship,  are  represented 
as  used  by  his  direction  on  the  occasion  of  the  removal  of  the  Ark  from  the 
house  of  Obed-edom  to  Jerusalem.  Of  these  cvi.  47,  48  bears  on  the  surface 
evidence  of  an  exilic  origin. 


CHAPTER  X 

RELIGION    FROM    THE    CONQUEST    TO    THE 
END   OF   THE   REIGN    OF   DAVID 

THE  period  through  which  Israel  passed  from  the  entry  into 
Canaan  under  Joshua  to  the  death  of  David  was  one  of 
turmoil.  The  nation  was  engaged  either  in  acquiring  and  occupy- 
ing new  territory,  or  in  defending  its  acquisitions  against  assail- 
ants; and  it  was  not  until  towards  the  close  of  David's  reign 
that  tranquillity  from  external  alarms  was  attained.  Such  a  time 
of  conflict  against  foreign  foes  was  not  likely  to  witness  great 
developments  in  religion  and  morals.  The  experiences  under- 
gone, though  they  helped  to  produce  the  conditions  essential  to 
future  intellectual  and  spiritual  progress,  were  not  favourable  to 
such  progress  in  the  immediate  present.  Consequently  the  state 
of  things  prevailing  during  this  age,  though  possessing  features  of 
its  own,  cannot  have  differed  very  extensively  from  that  of  the 
age  preceding  it;  and  appeal  may  reasonably  be  made  to  it  to 
confirm  or  disprove  the  conclusions  already  reached  respecting 
the  actual  contents  of  the  legislation  promulgated  by  Moses. 
Contact  with  Canaanite  corruption  did  not,  of  course,  leave 
Israel  altogether  unscathed ;  and  in  arguing  from  the  later  age  to 
the  earlier,  allowance  must  be  made  for  this.  The  influence 
of  communities,  in  some  respects  much  superior  in  civilisation, 
must  have  asserted  itself  amongst  the  Israelites,  in  spite  of  the 
injunctions  of  their  lawgiver  and  the  animosity  aroused  by  war. 
This  would  be  still  more  active  if  the  establishment  of  Israel 
in  Canaan  had  not  been  so  entirely  the  result  of  force  as  at  first 
sight  appears ;  and  where  peaceable  relations  were  set  up, 
Canaanite  ideas  and  usages  could  not  fail  to  spread.     But  it  may 

277 


278  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

be  doubted  whether  the  religious  apostasy  impHed,  for  instance, 
in  parts  of  the  book  of  Judges  was  really  as  complete  as  is  there 
represented.  The  wide  generalisations  of  what  has  been  termed 
"  the  framework  "  of  that  book  are  not  confirmed  by  some  of  the 
earlier  narratives  of  which  it  forms  the  setting;  for  these,  whilst 
testifying  to  some  adoption  of  alien  forms  of  religion  (see  Jud. 
V.  8),  do  not  indicate  a  wholesale  abandonment  by  the  nation  of 
the  service  of  Jehovah  {see  Jud.  vi.  13,  xi.  10).  It  seems  prob- 
able that  the  declension  from  Mosaic  principles  consisted  less  in 
the  substitution  of  the  worship  of  Canaanite  deities  for  that  of 
Jehovah  than  in  the  combination  of  the  two.  A  strong  motive 
for  uniting  the  service  of  the  native  Baalim  to  the  service  of 
their  own  national  God  would  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the 
Baalim  were  especially  associated  with  the  soil  and  regarded  as 
the  givers  of  fertiUty  (cf.  Hos.  ii,  5) ;  and  the  Israelites  just  at 
this  time  were  passing  from  pastoral  to  agricultural  life,  and 
would  therefore  be  inclined  to  propitiate  powers  connected  with 
the  latter. 

The  fact  that  worship  was  thus  rendered  to  other  gods  as  well 
as  to  Jehovah  proves  that  in  the  popular  belief  the  latter  was 
only  one  amongst  a  number  of  deities,  pre-eminent  but  not 
solitary  in  His  divine  attributes.^  To  the  mind  of  the  Israelites 
of  this  age  the  gods  of  the  peoples  about  them  were  equally  real 
with  their  own  God.  That  this  was  not  the  view  only  of  those 
who  were  unfaithful  to  Jehovah,  but  was  shared  by  those  whose 
loyalty  to  the  national  faith  is  unimpeached,  is  shown  by  more 
than  one  instance.  Jephthah  in  his  argument  with  the  Ammonites 
{Jud.  xi.  24)  assumes  that  the  relations  of  Chemosh  to  the  latter 
were  identical  with  those  of  Jehovah  to  Israel,  and  gives  no 
indication  that  he  considered  Chemosh  to  be  non-existent.  And 
if  it  is  possible  to  represent  his  language  as  only  an  argumentum 
ad  hominem^  it  is  more  difficult  to  explain  away  the  conclusion 
suggested  by  David's  words  in  i  Sa?n.  xxvi.    19,  namely,  that 

^  There  occur  passages,  indeed,  such  as  those  in  Josh.  ii.  11,  iii.  11,  in 
which  Jehovah  is  described  in  terms  suggestive  of  a  more  exalted  conception, 
but  the  first  of  these  comes  from  Deid.  iv.  39,  and  the  second,  which  has  its 
only  parallels  in  the  prophets  of  the  8th  and  subsequent  centuries  (see  Mic.  iv. 
13,  Zech.  iv.  14,  vi.  5),  is  connected  ungrammatically  with  its  context;  so  that 
both  may  be  later  insertions. 


RELIGION    FROM   JOSHUA  TO   DAVID     279 

David  himself  believed  in  the  reality  of  the  gods  who  were 
worshipped  beyond  the  Hmits  of  Israelite  soil.^  Nor  is  it  likely 
that  any  broad  distinction  could  be  drawn  between  Jehovah  and 
the  Canaanite  deities  so  long  as  the  same  title  Baal  was  applied 
to  the  former  as  well  as  to  the  latter.  And  that  this  was  the  case 
seems  beyond  question.  The  term  enters  into  the  composition 
of  two  names  belonging  to  the  family  of  Saul,  Eshbaal  and 
Meribbaal ;  and  it  is  scarcely  credible  that  in  these  it  represents 
any  other  divinity  except  Jehovah.  In  the  name  of  one  of 
David's  warriors,  Bealiah,  it  actually  occurs  in  combination  with 
Jah,  the  shortened  form  oi  Jehovah  {i  Ch.  xii.  5).  And  finally, 
even  as  late  as  the  time  of  Rosea,  the  appellation  Baali  (my 
Baal)  was  popularly  applied  to  Israel's  God  by  His  worshippers ; 
and  the  inevitable  results  of  the  practice  upon  the  people's  belief 
are  recognised  by  the  prophet  (see  Hos.  ii.  16). 

But  just  in  proportion  as  Israel  believed  the  gods  of  foreign 
nations  to  be  real  entities,  it  believed  that  such  nations  had  no 
part  in  the  care  or  providence  of  Jehovah.  It  considered 
Jehovah  to  be  exclusively  its  own  God,  itself  to  be  Jehovah's 
people,  and  its  land  to  be  Jehovah's  inheritance  {2  Sam.  i.  12, 
I  Sam.  xxvi.  19,  2  Satn.  xiv.  16,  xxi.  4).  Israel's  battles  were 
Jehovah's  battles  (Jt^d.  v.  23,  vii.  18,  i  Sam.  xviii.  17,  xxv.  28), 
and  when  Israel  suffered  disgrace,  Jehovah's  name  was  profaned 
(7  Sam.  xii.  22).  The  identification  of  Jehovah's  cause  with 
that  of  the  Hebrew  people  found  reflection  in  the  title  "  Jehovah 
of  Hosts "  {Jehovah  Tsebdoth),  which,  as  at  first  used,  seems  to 
have  had  reference  to  the  IsraeUte  armies  (see  Ex.  vii.  4,  i  Sam. 
xvii.  45,  of.  ver.  26).^  It  was  especially  in  the  conduct  and  destiny 
of  the  nation's  leaders  that  Jehovah's  power  manifested  itself. 
To  His  spirit  was  due  the  prowess  of  Othniel  {Jud.  iii.  10), 
Gideon  {Jud.  vi.  34),  Jephthah  {Jud.  xi.  29),  Samson  {Jud.  xiii. 

^  In  -?  Sam.  vii.  22  Jehovah's  sole  godhead  is  asserted  just  as  in  2  Is. 
xlv.  5,  21 ;  but  the  section  ver.  22-24  in  which  the  statement  occurs  has  some 
close  parallels  to  Deut.  (see  Deu(.  vii.  8,  ix.  26,  xv.  15  [redeem),  x.  21  {great 
and  terrible  things),  iv.  34),  and  probably  proceeds  from  the  compiler;  cf. 
Introd.  pp.  9-10. 

"^  The  word  host  is  likewise  applied  to  (i)  the  stars,  *'  the  host  of  heaven" 
(see  2  Is.  xl.  26, y<?r.  xxxiii.  22),  but  in  this  sense  the  singular  alone  is  used; 
(2)  the  angels  (see  /  Kg.  xxii.  19,  *'/j."  xxiv.  21,  Ps.  ciii.  20,  21),  but  in  this 
sense  the  plural,  if  used,  is  tsebdim  not  tsebdoih. 


28o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

25,  xiv.  6,  etc.),  Saul  (i  Sam.  xi.  6),  and  David  (i  Sam.  xvi.  13). 
To  Him  were  ascribed  any  impressive  natural  occurrences  which 
affected  the  people's  fortunes.  He  was  the  author  of  the  plagues 
that  befell  the  Philistines  when  the  Ark  was  among  them,  and  of 
the  thunder  which  is  said  to  have  discomfited  them.  "The  sound 
of  marching  in  the  tops  of  the  mulberry  trees  "  in  the  valley  of 
Rephaim  was  explained  to  signify  that  He  had  gone  out  before 
David  to  smite  his  enemies  (2  Sam.  v.  24).  And  as  He  was  the 
source  of  good  to  His  people,  He  was  also  the  source  of  evil.* 
From  Him  came  the  stubbornness  of  Eli's  sons  {2  Sam.  ii.  25), 
the  melancholy  and  vindictiveness  which  possessed  Saul  in  his 
later  years  (z  Sam.  xvi.  14,  xviii.  10),  and  the  perverse  impulse 
which  led  David  to  number  the  people  (2  Sam.  xxiv.  i),  just 
as  from  Him  in  earlier  days  had  proceeded  the  infatuation  of 
Pharaoh  and  Sihon  (JEx.  iv.  21,  ix.  12,  £>euf.  ii.  30).  He  sent 
plagues  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Bethshemesh  as  well  as  upon  the 
Philistines  {i  Sam.  vi.  19),  smote  Uzzah  for  touching  the  Ark 
{2  Sam.  vi.  7),  and  visited  the  land  with  famine  and  pestilence 
{2  Sam.  xxi.  i,  xxiv.  15).  And  as  Jehovah,  in  the  writings  relat- 
ing to  this  period,  appears  generally  exclusive  in  His  sympathies, 
and  unaccountable  and  arbitrary  in  some  of  His  actions,  so  the 
worship  rendered  to  Him  is  largely  ceremonial  and  formal,  and 
the  conduct  believed  to  be  acceptable  to  Him  is  sometimes  cruel. 
The  Ark,  as  in  the  time  of  Moses,  was  still  the  chief  symbol 
of  Jehovah's  presence  amongst  His  people.  This,  when  trans- 
ported from  place  to  place,  was  kept  in  a  tent  {2  Sam.  vii.  6-7), 
but  at  Shiloh,  whither  it  was  brought  by  Joshua,  it  was  seemingly 
placed  in  a  more  substantial  structure  (called  in  i  Sam.  i.  7,  9, 
iii.  3,  the  house,  or  temple,  of  Jehovah),^  which  had  doors  and 
doorposts,  and  within  which  a  lamp  was  regularly  kept  burning 
(7  Sam.  i.  9,  iii.  3,  15)  and  an  attendant  was  constantly  present. 
In  time  of  war  it  was  regarded  as  a  palladium ;  and  before  the 
battle  of  Ebenezer  it  was  taken  into  the  Israelite  camp  (7  Sam. 
iv.  3  foil.,  cf.  2  Sam.  xi.  1 1,  Num.  xiv.  44).  In  the  ensuing  engage- 
ment it  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  PhiUstines,  and  by  them  was 

1  Cf.  Am.  iii.  6,  Ezek.  xx.  25,  2  Is.  xiv.  7. 

2  In  Josh.  vi.  24,  ix.  23  (29),  the  term  house  (of  Jehovah)  is  omitted  by  the 
LXX- 


RELIGION   FROM   JOSHUA  TO   DAVID     281 

carried  in  succession  to  several  of  their  cities,  its  progress  being 
accompanied  by  plagues.  When  restored  to  Israel  after  an 
absence  of  some  months,  it  was  left  ?.t  Kiriath  Jearim  in  charge 
of  one  Abinadab;  and  as  the  death  of  Uzzah  happened  in  the 
course  of  its  removal  thence,  it  was  deposited  by  David  in  the 
house  of  Obed-edom.  Finally  it  was  conveyed  to  Jerusalem 
where  it  was  placed  in  a  tent  which  David  pitched  for  it  {2  Sam. 
vi.  17),  and  to  which  presumably  reference  is  made  in  i  Kg.  i. 
39,  ii.  28,  viii.  4.^  So  sacred  was  it  believed  to  be  that  the 
plagues  which  broke  out  at  the  Philistine  cities  which  harboured 
it  and  at  Bethshemesh  afterwards,  were  ascribed  to  profane  treat- 
ment of  it;  and  similarly  the  sudden  death  of  Uzzah  was 
attributed  to  his  rashly  handling  it. 

But  though  the  presence  of  the  Ark,  first  at  Shiloh  and  after- 
wards at  Jerusalem,  gave  to  these  places  a  pre-eminent  position 
in  the  estimation  of  the  people,  they  were  not  the  sole  sanctuaries. 
Allusions  to  a  large  number  of  others,  scattered  here  and  there 
throughout  the  country,  occur  in  the  history  of  this  period. 
Among  these  were  Hebron  and  Bethlehem,  in  Judah  {2  Sam. 
XV.  7,  I  Sam.  xvi.  5,  xx.  6),  the  mount  of  Olives  near  Jerusalem 
{2  Sam.  XV.  32),  Gilgal,  Bethel,  Mizpah,  Ramah,  Nob,  Gibeon, 
in  Benjamin  and  Ephraim  (z  Sam.  xi.  15  (cf.  xv.  12,  15),  x.  3, 
vii.  6,  17,  xxi.  I  foil.,  I  Kg.  iii.  4),  Mount  Ebal,  near  Shechem 
{Josh.  viii.  30),  Ophrah,  in  Manasseh  {/ud.  viii.  27),  Laish,  or 
Dan,  in  the  extreme  north  {Jud.  xviii.  30),  and  Mizpah  in  Gilead 
(Jud.  xi.  11).  Two  of  these  are  regarded  by  the  writer  of  the 
book  of  Judges  with  disapproval,  namely  those  erected  by  the 
Danites  at  Laish  and  by  Gideon  at  his  native  Ophrah — possibly 
because  of  the  image  worship  practised  at  them.  But  there  is 
no  indication  that  the  existence  of  the  rest  was  irregular  and 
illegitimate,  though  it  is  contrary  to  the  direction  contained  in 
Deut.  xii.  5-7.  It  can,  indeed,  be  urged  that  the  institution  of 
some  of  these  was  either  directly  enjoined,  or  became  necessary 
or  expedient  during  the  interval  between  the  destruction  of 
Shiloh  and  the  final  removal  of  the  Ark  to  Jerusalem.  But 
there  is  nothing  to  suggest  that  their  origin  is  to  be  thus  ex- 

^  The  Chronicler  supposes  that  the  Mosaic  tabernacle  was  at  this  time  at 
Gibeon  {/  Ch.  xvi.  39,  xxi.  29,  s  Ch.  i.  3). 


282  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

plained ;  whilst  there  are  others,  such  as  those  at  Olivet,  Hebron, 

and  Gibeon,  which  were  contemporaneous  with  the  existence  of 
a  sanctuary  at  Jerusalem,  and  for  which  the  consideration  just 
noticed  does  not  account.^  Of  the  reasons  which  led  to  these 
various  locaHties  being  regarded  as  sanctuaries,  nothing  is 
definitely  known,  though  it  may  be  conjectured  that  they  were 
severally  the  scenes  of  various  occurrences  which  were  believed 
to  be  specially  indicative  of  the  Divine  activity.  At  certain  of 
these  the  principal  object  of  importance  seems  to  have  been  an 
Ephod  {Jud.  viii.  27,  z  Safn.  xxi.  9;  ci.  Jud.  xviii.  14,  20).  An 
ephod  was  used  for  the  purpose  of  divining  the  will  of  Jehovah 
(/  Sam.  xiv.  18  (LXX.),  xxiii.  9,  xxx.  7) ;  but  its  real  nature  is 
uncertain.  The  term  usually  describes  the  linen  garment 
regularly  worn  by  priests  (j  Sam.  xxii.  18,  cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  18), 
and  is  so  explained  by  Josephus  in  connection  with  i  Sam.  xiv. 
18,  xxx.  7;  but  the  description  m  Jud.  viii.  26  of  the  construction 
of  Gideon's  ephod  at  Ophrah  from  the  golden  spoils  of  the 
Ishmaelites  (amounting  to  the  weight  of  1,700  shekels),  and  the 
language  of  i  Sa^n.  xxi.  9,  which  relates  that  the  sword  of  Goliath 
was  kept  at  Nob  behind  the  ephod^  suggests  that  it  was  some  kind 
of  image.  Otherwise  the  only  mention  of  an  image  in  con- 
nection with  the  worship  of  Jehovah  during  this  period  occurs 
in  the  story  of  Micah  and  the  Danites.  Another  way  by  which 
the  will  of  Jehovah  might  be  ascertained  was  through  Urim  and 
Thummim.  These  appear  to  have  been  two  sacred  lots  (see 
I  Safn.  xiv.  40  foil.  LXX.)  by  means  of  which  a  decision  could 
be  obtained  between  two  doubtful  alternatives.  A  third  medium 
of  divination  was  the  Teraphim  (see  Ezek.  xxi.  21  foil.,  Zech. 
X.  2).  The  use  of  teraphim^  according  to  i  Sam.  xv.  23,  was 
forbidden ;  but  they  were  found  not  only  in  the  house  of  Micah 
{Jud.  xvii.  5),  but  also  in  that  of  David  (z  Sam.  xix.  13).  The 
latter  passage  suggests  that  they  were  images  of  human  form,  but 
the  method  of  their  employment  is  quite  unknown. 

In  regard  to  the  Priesthood,  it  would  appear  that  the  service 
of  the  Ark,  after  the  death  of  Aaron,  remained  in  his  family. 

^  Similarly  at  an  earlier  period  the  sanctuaries  at  Mizpah,  Bethel,  and 
Shiloh  Jtid.  XX.  I,  26  (cf.  xxi.  2),  xxi.  19)  seem  to  have  been  contemporaneous, 
the  Ark  being  situated  at  Bethel  (xx.  27). 


RELIGION   FROM   JOSHUA  TO   DAVID     283 

Aaron's  immediate  successor  (as  has  been  seen)  was  his  third  son 
Eleazar  {Num.  xx.  25  foil.),  who  was  Joshua's  contemporary  and 
coadjutor  in  the  work  of  apportioning  the  land  of  Canaan  among 
the  several  tribes  {Josh.  xiv.  i).  Eleazar  was  followed  by 
Phinehas  {Jud.  xx.  27-28);  but  after  the  death  of  the  latter,  the 
succession  is  obscure,  for  Eli  was  probably  descended  from 
Aaron's  fourth  son  Ithamar.^  Eli  had  two  sons,  Hophni  and 
Phinehas;  and  when  these  were  slain  at  Ebenezer,  the  priest- 
hood passed  to  Phinehas'  son  Ahitub  {i  Sam.  xiv.  3).  Ahitub's 
son  Ahijah  has  been  identified  with  the  Ahimelech  of  i  Sam. 
xxi.  I,  xxii.  9;  and  when  he  with  his  fellow-priests  were  executed 
by  order  of  Saul,  his  son  Abiathar  fled  to  David  {i  Sar?i.  xxii.  20), 
and  was  made  high  priest  when  the  latter  became  king.  But 
Zadok,  of  the  house  of  Eleazar,  was  also  priest  during  David's 
reign  {2  Sam.  viii.  17),^  though  perhaps  in  a  subordinate  position; 
for  when  Solomon  deposed  Abiathar  from  his  office  for  support- 
ing Adonijah,  he  substituted  Zadok  (/  Kg.  ii.  27,  35),  from  whom 
the  subsequent  high  priests  derived  their  lineage.  But  though 
the  descendants  of  Aaron  were  thus  specially  attached  to  the 
leading  sanctuary,  the  priesthood  was  not  confined  to  them,  for 
Levites  in  general  were  in  request  as  priests  elsewhere  {/ud. 
xvii.  13).  And  it  is  clear  that  priestly  functions  could  even  be 
discharged  by  others  than  Levites  not  only  in  times  of  corrup- 
tion, but  under  more  settled  conditions.  Micah,  an  Ephraimite, 
before  he  obtained  the  services  of  a  Levite,  made  one  of  his  own 
sons  a  priest  {/ud.  xvii.  5) ;  Samuel,  who  offered  sacrifice,  and 
wore  the  priestly  garment,  the  ephod,  was  also  an  Ephraimite 
{i  Sam.  i.);  and  sacrificial  rites  were  performed  by  Gideon  a 
Manassite  {/ud.  vi.),  Manoah  a  Danite  {/ud.  xiii.)  and  Saul, 
who  was  a  Benjamite  {i  Sam.  xiii.  9,  12).  David,  a  native  of 
Judah,  is  related  to  have  worn  the  priestly  ephod  {2  Sam.  vi.  14), 
and  to  have  blessed  the  people  {2  Sam.  vi.  17,  18)  ;3  whilst  he 

*  See  p.  210,  note. 

^  In  this  verse  Ahimelech  the  son  of  Abiathar  is  probably  a  mistake  for 
Abiathar  the  son  of  Ahimelech  ;  see  p.  259,  note. 

^  Similarly  in  Homeric  times,  though  the  priesthood  was  an  established 
institution,  yet  chiefs  like  Nestor  and  his  sons,  and  even  swineherds  like 
Eumseus,  offered  sacrifice  without  the  intervention  of  a  priest  {Od.  iii.  440  foil., 
xiv.  446). 


284  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

had  amongst  his  priests  certain  of  his  own  sons,  as  well  as  a 
Manassite  called  Ira  {2  Sam.  viii.  18,  xx.  26).  Some  of  these 
instances  of  priestly  duties  being  undertaken  by  others  than 
Levites  are  no  doubt  capable  of  explanation.  The  sacrifices  of 
Gideon  and  Manoah  (according  to  the  historian)  were  oflfered 
under  exceptional  circumstances  to  angels  who  are  related  to  have 
appeared  to  them ;  and  the  sacrifice  offered  by  Saul  is  possibly 
to  be  regarded  as  illegitimate.^  But  others  of  the  instances 
adduced  are  not  so  easily  explained  away;  and  even  if  Samuel 
be  thought  to  have  been  invested  with  the  authority  of  a  priest 
in  virtue  of  his  character  as  a  prophet,  the  case  of  David's  sons, 
at  least,  is  in  striking  contradiction  to  the  injunctions  of  Deutero- 
nomy and  the  Priestly  code. 

The  Chronicler  (/  Ch.  vi.  22-28)  regards  Samuel  as  of  Levitical  descent, 
and  describes  David's  sons  not  as  priests,  but  as  "chief  about  the  king" 
(/  Ch.  xviii.  17) ;  whilst  in  his  account  of  the  removal  of  the  Ark  to  Jeru- 
salem {i  Ch.  XV.)  he  represents  the  distinction  drawn  in  the  Priestly  code 
between  Priests  and  Levites  as  being  strictly  observed. 

It  deserves  notice  that  the  Levite  procured  by  Micah  to  act  as  priest  is 
described  as  being  of  Bethkhem-jxidah,  of  the  family  ofjudah  {Jud.  xvii.  7) ; 
and  as  the  last  words  seem  superfluous  as  an  explanation  of  the  position  of 
Bethlehem-judah,  it  is  possible  that  they  relate  to  the  Levite.  If  so,  it  has 
been  suggested  that  the  term  Levite  denotes  his  avocation  rather  than  his 
tribal  descent,  it  being  assumed  that  priestly  lore  was,  for  the  most  part, 
preserved  amongst  the  descendants  of  Levi  only,  but  that  it  was  sometimes 
imparted  to  others  also,  who  were  in  consequence  reckoned  Levites.  This 
assumption  likewise  meets  the  case  of  Samuel. 

Of  the  mode  of  worship,  the  recurrent  festivals,  and  the  dues 
assigned  to  the  priests,  few  particulars  are  given.  The  various 
kinds  of  offerings  alluded  to  in  the  books  dealing  with  this  period 
are  burnt-offerings  (7  Sam.  vii.  7,  x.  8),  peace-offerings  (7  Sam. 
X.  8,  xi.  15),  offerings  for  atonement  (z  Sam.  xxvi.  19,  cf.  iii.  14), 
meal-offerings  (including  the  Shewbread)  and  drink-offerings 
(both  of  wine  and  of  water  2  (j  Sam.  i.  24,  x.  3,  vii.  6,  2  Sam. 
xxiii.  16)).  In  the  case  of  animal  sacrifices,  the  fat  of  the 
victim  was  ordinarily  burnt  on  the  altar  {2  Sam.  ii.  15),  whilst 
its  flesh  was  boiled  (ver.  13,  oi.  Jud.  vi.  19),  and  formed  a  meal 
for  the  worshippers  (cf.  also  2  Sam.  vi.  19) — the  sacrifices  here 
described    being    doubtless    peace-offerings.     The    Shewbread, 

^  But  see  p.  222. 

^  C£  Verg.  A.  xi.  23-4,  summo  hausit  de  gurgite  lymphas^  Multa  deos  orans. 


RELIGION   FROM   JOSHUA  TO   DAVID     285 

which  was  presented  before  Jehovah  at  the  sanctuary  (at  Nob), 
and  according  to  Lev.  xxiv.  5-9  (P)  was  to  be  eaten  by  the  sons  of 
Aaron  only,  might  (according  to  i  Sam.  xxi.  4)  be  partaken  of 
by  anyone  who  was  technically  holy ;  and  probably  other  meal- 
offerings  were  in  part  presented  before  the  Deity,  and  in  part 
eaten  by  the  worshippers.^  Of  the  flesh  -  offerings  the  priests 
had  a  share,^  but  what  it  legitimately  was  is  not  indicated  (for 
the  conduct  of  Eli's  sons  (7  Sam.  ii.  13-16)  was  manifestly  an 
abuse  ^).  The  only  festivals  named  are  mentioned  in  connection 
with  Shiloh  and  Bethlehem  (Jud.  xxi.  18,  i  Sam.  i.  3,  xx.  6), 
that  at  Shiloh  being  probably  the  Feast  of  Ingathering,  which 
was  a  vintage  festival  {/ud.  xxi.  21).  The  New  Moon  was  also 
observed  (7  Sam.  xx.  5);  and  though  no  religious  function  is 
expressly  stated  to  have  been  associated  with  it,  the  fact  that  un- 
cleanness  excluded  from  the  feast  held  on  the  day  (ver.  26) 
points  to  its  having  a  religious  character,  as  was  certainly  the 
case  later  {Is.  i.  13).  Fasting  seems  to  have  been  sometimes 
practised  as  a  means  of  obtaining  Divine  favours  {i  Sam.  xiv.  24). 

In  regard  to  sacrifices  the  Chronicler,  in  accordance  with  his  habit,  carries 
back  to  the  time  of  David  the  custom  of  offering  burnt  sacrifices  every  day 
both  in  the  morning  and  in  the  evening  (/  Ch.  xvi.  40) — a  usage  which  the 
other  historical  books  imply  did  not  prevail  till  a  later  date. 

More  than  one  instance  occurs  of  an  offering  made  in  pur- 
suance of  a  vow  {/ud.  xi.  30,  31,  2  Sam.  xv.  7).  Jephthah's 
sacrifice  of  his  daughter  in  consequence  of  his  vow  to  offer  as 
a  burnt-offering  to  Jehovah  whatever  came  forth  from  his  house 
to  meet  him  on  his  return  from  battle  has  been  taken  to  point 
to  the  prevalence  of  human  sacrifice  among  the  IsraeHtes  at  this 

^  In  /  Sam.  x.  4  Saul  is  presented  with  two  loaves  by  certain  men  who  are 
going  up  to  worship  at  Bethel,  who  thereby  make  him  a  sharer  in  their 
sacrificial  feast. 

2  Cf.  the  LXX.  of  I  Sam.  ii.  12-13  koI  viol  'HXei  rov  lepim  .  .  .  ovk 
el86T€S  rbv  KOpiov  Kal  rb  dtKalu/xa  toD  i^piios  irapk  rov  \aov  TravT^s  toO  dvovTOS. 

'  The  offence  of  the  young  men  seems  to  have  been  two-fold:  (i)  they 
robbed  the  worshippers  by  claiming  all  the  flesh  which  the  flesh-hook,  when 
struck  into  the  vessel  containing  it,  brought  up  (ver.  13, 14) ;  (2)  they  dishonoured 
the  Deity  (cf.  ver.  17  marg.)  by  daring  to  take  raw  flesh  for  roasting  before 
the  fat  was  burnt. 

Of  the  cities  which  according  to  /osh.  xxi.  were  set  apart  for  the  support 
of  the  sacerdotal  order  there  appears  no  indication  in  the  writings  relating  to 
this  period.  Nob,  which  in  /  Sam.  xxii.  19  is  termed  ^Ae  city  of  the  priests^  is 
not  among  those  enumerated  xvijosh. 


286  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

period;  but  the  circumstances  of  the  case  are  perhaps  too  am- 
biguous and  the  case  itself  certainly  too  isolated  to  afford  suffi- 
cient basis  for  such  a  conclusion.^  A  special  kind  of  vow  was 
that  of  the  Nazirites,  of  which  Samson  and  probably  Samuel 
were  made  the  subjects  {Jud.  xiii.  5,  i  Sam.  i.  11).  This  re- 
quired them  to  refrain  all  their  life  long  from  cutting  the  hair 
of  their  heads;  and  from  the  fact  that  the  mother  of  Samson 
before  his  birth  was  directed  to  abstain  from  drinking  wine  or 
strong  drink,  and  from  touching  anything  unclean,  it  has  been 
presumed  that  the  same  prohibitions  applied  to  her  son,  and  that 
these  abstentions  formed  even  at  this  time  part  of  the  vow  (cf.  Ajh. 
ii.  12).  It  is,  however,  difficult  to  reconcile  this  with  the  stories 
related  of  Samson,  who  must  often  have  incurred  defilement  from 
contact  with  dead  bodies,  even  if  he  refrained  from  the  use  of 
wine,  which,  in  view  of  his  character,  seems  unlikely. 

It  has  already  been  pointed  out  that  the  Nazirite  vow,  regulated  in  Num. 
vi.,  differed  from  the  historic  instances,  just  alluded  to,  of  Samson  and 
Samuel  in  being  temporary  instead  of  life-long ;  whilst  other  features  of 
unlikeness  are  the  explicit  injunctions  against  using  the  products  of  the  vine 
or  incurring  pollution  from  a  corpse  during  the  period  of  the  vow,  and 
the  direction  to  offer  at  the  end  of  it  the  hair  of  the  head  to  be  burnt  on 
the  altar. 

From  this  sketch  it  will  be  seen  that  the  outward  conditions 
of  religion  during  the  period  corroborate  the  view  previously 
taken  of  the  Mosaic  legislation.  The  ecclesiastical  organisation 
of  the  Priestly  code,  with  its  centralised  service,  its  extensive  and 
precise  system  of  sacrifice,  its  rigid  lines  of  division  between  the 
several  classes  of  ministers,  and  its  ornate  equipment  both  of 
the  sanctuary  and  the  priesthood  is  conspicuously  absent.^  The 
religious  worship  of  the  community  is  relatively  simple  in  character, 
connected  with  country  occupations  and  tribal  and  family  life, 
and  associated  with  a  number  of  favoured  localities  consecrated 
by  tradition  or  by  natural  suitability.  It  must,  of  course,  be 
granted   that   the   history   does   not   afford   much   occasion   for 

^  The  death  of  Agag  and  the  death  of  Saul's  sons  (/  Sam,  xv.  33,  2  Sam. 
xxi.  6,  9)  were  religious  executions  at  a  sanctuary  or  holy  place,  not  sacrifices 
in  any  strict  sense ;  cf.  Num.  xxv.  4. 

^  In  /  Sam.  ii.  22  the  reference  to  "the  women  who  did  service  at  the  door 
of  the  tent  of  meeting,"  who  are  mentioned  in  Ex.  xxxviii.  8  (derived  from  P), 
is  omitted  by  the  LXX« 


RELIGION   FROM  JOSHUA   TO   DAVID    287 

careful  description  of  religious  usages;  and  breaches  occur  of 
principles  which,  it  is  allowed,  had  certainly  been  affirmed  before 
this.  But  in  general  the  impression  produced  is  that  the  legisla- 
tion with  which  the  nation  was  acquainted  at  this  time,  whether 
obeyed  or  disobeyed,  was  not  that  of  the  Levitical  code;  and 
that  this  body  of  law,  in  its  complete  form,  was  not  existent  at 
the  period  under  review.  The  religious  institutions  of  the  times 
of  the  Judges  and  the  early  Monarchy  are  most  in  harmony  with 
those  which  have  place  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant;  and  the 
evidence  thus  furnished  confirms  the  distinction  that  has  been 
drawn  between  various  portions  of  the  Pentateuchal  Laws. 

The  sensuous  conceptions  which  entered  into  the  religion  of 
the  Mosaic  age  are  observable  in  the  beliefs  and  usages  of  this. 
The  sanctity  attached  to  the  Ark,  the  confidence  felt  in  its  mere 
presence,  the  stress  laid  upon  physical  purity  as  a  condition  of 
religious  communion,  were  features  common  to  both.  Religion 
was  doubtless  in  a  great  degree  a  matter  of  ceremonial.  It  does 
not  follow  that  because  ritual  was  not  so  elaborate  or  rigid  as  is 
represented  in  the  Priestly  code  that  it  was  unimportant  in  early 
Israel.  It  was  probably  preserved  and  transmitted  by  tradition, 
and  whilst  following  a  general  type,  possibly  varied  in  details  at 
different  places.  But  in  spite  of  the  formalism  which  the  religion 
of  Israel  shared  with  ancient  religions  in  general,  it  was  never- 
theless an  active  moral  force  in  the  nation;  and  the  history 
of  this  age  indicates  that,  notwithstanding  individual  cases  of 
depravity,  the  Israelites  recognised  in  some  respects  a  higher 
standard  of  conduct  than  prevailed  amongst  their  neighbours. 
In  regard  to  sensuality,  for  instance,  the  existence  of  a  healthy 
public  opinion  is  apparent  from  the  punishment  inflicted  on 
Gibeah  for  an  atrocious  act,  and  by  the  language  used  con- 
cerning sexual  offences  in  2  Sam.  xiii.  12  and  elsewhere.  In 
the  promotion  and  advancement  of  morality  religion  was  the 
chief  agent — a  result  principally  due  to  the  prophets;  and  it 
is  the  fact  that  the  age  now  under  notice  witnessed  a  great 
development  of  the  prophetic  spirit  that  constitutes  the  leading 
feature  of  its  religious  history. 

The  function  of  a  Prophet,  as  represented  in  the  history  of  the 
Patriarchal  and  Mosaic  periods,  was  to  act  as  a  mediator  between 


288  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

God  and  man ;  and  in  Deut.  xviii.  14  foil,  he  is  declared  to  be 
the  appointed  channel  of  Jehovah's  communications  to  His  people, 
who  are  directed  to  hearken  to  the  prophet  who  should  from  time 
to  time  be  raised  up  among  them,  instead  of  to  the  augurs  and 
diviners  whom  the  Canaanites  and  other  nations  consulted.  In 
J  Sam.  ix.  9  the  term  Prophet  {ndbi)  is  said  to  have  displaced 
an  older  word  Seer  {roeh)  ;^  and  it  seems  to  be  implied  that  the 
change  was  made  subsequently  to  the  time  of  Samuel.  This 
does  not  agree  with  the  evidence  of  the  preceding  books  as  they 
exist  at  present,  for  the  word  prophet  occurs  in  the  history  of 
much  earlier  periods  (see  Gen.  xx,  7,  Num.  xi.  25-29,  xii.  6, 
Jud.  iv.  4,  vi.  8).  Its  use,  however,  in  these  passages  may  be  an 
anachronism  arising  from  the  writers  of  them  being  more  familiar 
with  the  later  than  the  earlier  name  (though  the  latter  survived, 
and  is  employed  in  2  Ch.  xvi.  7  in  reference  to  persons  living 
in  the  time  of  Asa).  Be  this  as  it  may,  some  of  the  narratives 
in  I  Sam.  reveal  the  seer  or  prophet  in  an  aspect  suggestive  of 
primitive  conditions.  On  the  one  hand,  it  was  to  Samuel  in  his 
character  as  a  seer  that  Saul  is  represented  as  resorting  in  a 
matter  purely  secular,  and  offering  a  trifling  present  ^  in  the  hope 
that  he  might  obtain  from  him  information  respecting  the  where- 
abouts of  some  strayed  asses.  And  on  the  other  hand,  the  bands 
of  prophets  who  on  two  occasions  were  encountered  by  Saul,  if 
inspired  by  religion,  manifested  it  in  its  least  rational  aspect. 
First,  when  Saul  left  Samuel  after  the  interview  just  mentioned, 
he  fell  in  with  a  number  of  prophets,  attended  by  music ;  and 
on  meeting  them,  he  was  infected  by  their  spirit  and  "prophesied" 
with  them.  And  again,  at  a  later  period,  when  he  sent  messengers 
to  Naioth  to  take  David,  the  men  found  Samuel  there  at  the  head 
of  a  company  of  prophets,  prophesying;  and  they,  yielding  to 
the  prophetic  impulse,  prophesied  also ;  whilst  Saul  himself, 
coming  down  afterwards,  likewise  shared  the  contagion,  and 
prophesied,  lying  down  naked  all  that  day  and  night.  These 
accounts  indicate  that  in  early  times  the  name  prophet  was  used 
to   describe    men    possessed   with   reUgious   frenzy,   which   was 

^  There  was  also  another  word  for  seer^  namely  hozeh^  which  is  applied  to 
Gad,  Iddo,  Hanani,  Amos,  and  others. 

2  For  other  instances  of  a  fee  or  reward  being  given  to  a  prophet  see  /  Kg, 
juv.  3,  2  Kg.  viii.  8,  and  cf.  Mic.  iii.  11,  Euk.  xxii.  25. 


RELIGION   FROM  JOSHUA  TO   DAVID    289 

augmented  by  music,^  and  found  expression  in  wild  and  fervid 
utterance,  probably  delivered  in  rhythmical  cadence,  to  which 
the  term  "prophesying"  was  applied. ^  That  an  excited  bearing 
and  a  strange  behaviour  were  originally  associated  with  prophecy 
is  suggested  further  by  the  fact  that  the  prophets  were  fre- 
quently assailed  with  the  charge  of  being  madmen  (see  2  Kg. 
ix.  II,  Jtr,  xxix.  26,  of.  also  Hos.  ix.  7).  No  doubt,  how- 
ever, there  was  at  most  times  considerable  method  in  the 
madness  of  the  prophets ;  and  in  the  succeeding  history  the 
ecstatic  or  frenzied  condition  becomes  increasingly  less  frequent. 
Their  enthusiasm  manifested  itself  more  especially  at  the  crises, 
political  and  religious,  of  their  country's  career;  and  it  was  un- 
mistakably to  those  prophets  in  whom  religious  faith  and  fervour 
were  combined  with  intellectual  capacity  that  Israel  mainly  owed, 
in  the  early  period  of  its  history,  its  national  well-being,  and  in 
later  times,  its  spiritual  pre-eminence  amongst  mankind. 

Of  the  individual  prophets  whose  lives  fell  within  the  age  at 
present  under  consideration,  the  most  prominent  were  Deborah, 
Samuel,  Nathan,  and  Gad,  the  others  alluded  to  {Jud.  vi.  8, 
I  Sam.  ii.  27)  being  nameless.  Of  the  four  named  the  first 
lived  previous  to,  and  the  last  two  after,  the  institution  of  the 
monarchy ;  whilst  it  was  during  the  lifetime,  and  largely  through 
the  agency,  of  Samuel  that  the  monarchy  came  into  existence. 
But  the  rise  of  royalty  in  Israel  is  more  than  a  chronological  date 
in  the  history  of  prophecy.  It  is  a  dividing-line  between  two  distinct 
phases  of  prophetic  activity,  so  that  a  review  of  prophecy  in  the 
early  post-Mosaic  age  (prior  to  the  8th  century)  falls,  in  conse- 
quence, into  two  periods.  During  the  first  of  these,  Israel  was 
engaged  in  continual  conflict  with  its  numerous  enemies;  and 
the  task  of  contemporary  prophets  was  to  preserve  the  religion  of 
Israel  from  the  peril  of  external  suppression  rather  than  of 
internal  corruption.  Both  Deborah  and  Samuel  were  alike 
instrumental  in  rousing  Israel  to  offer  resistance  to  its  oppres- 
sors ;  and  they  might  as  fairly  be  called  political  counsellors  and 
patriots  as  religious  teachers.     Yet  it  requires  to  be  recognised 

^  Even  Elisha  had  recourse  to  music  to  kindle  his  prophetic  fervour  (2  A>, 
iii.  15)- 

^  The  term  is  even  used  of  the  Temple  singers  (/  Ch.  xxv.  i). 

U 


290  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

that  in  the  preservation  of  Israel's  independence  the  promotion 
of  religious  truth  was  at  this  epoch  involved;  and  their  service 
to  religion  was  not  the  less  real  because  it  consisted  in  the 
assertion  of  the  cause  of  Israel  against  its  foes  rather  than  in  any 
marked  advance  upon  the  moral  standards  of  their  time.  The 
faith  to  which  Deborah,  for  instance,  brought  back  her  country- 
men was,  on  the  whole,  nobler  and  purer  than  that  of  the 
Canaanites ;  and  it  is  in  virtue  of  this  that  she  may  deservedly  be 
considered  a  prophetess  of  the  true  God,  in  spite  of  her  praise 
of  Jael's  treacherous  murder  of  Sisera.  In  her  eulogy  of  Jael, 
Deborah  reflects  the  spirit  of  her  age,  in  which  the  obligations  of 
morality  were  recognised  as  extending  but  faintly  beyond  the  limits 
of  nationality,  and  in  which  a  breach  of  honour,^  if  committed  in 
the  interests  of  Israel  against  a  national  foe,  was  not  only  not 
condemned  but  was  even  commended.  Nevertheless  it  was  with 
the  preservation  of  Israel,  and  thereby  of  Israel's  faith  in  Jehovah, 
narrow  and  exclusive  though  this  then  was,  that  the  future  of 
spiritual  religion  rested;  and  by  contributing  to  this,  Deborah 
claims  a  place  in  the  long  line  of  religious  leaders  which  had  its 
culmination  in  the  great  teachers  of  the  8th,  7th,  and  6th 
centuries.  It  is  from  the  same  point  of  view  that  Samuel's  act 
in  slaying  the  Amalekite  Agag,  whom  Saul  had  spared,  must  be 
estimated.  If  the  account  in  i  Sam.  xv.  has  an  historical 
foundation,  the  prophet,  who  at  first  sight  compares  unfavourably 
with  the  king,  must  be  judged  by  the  standard  of  his  country 
and  times.  The  practice  of  "devoting"  hostile  cities  and  popu- 
lations to  the  national  god  was  followed  (as  has  been  shown) 
by  other  Semitic  peoples  beside  the  Hebrews ;  and  it  was  not 
felt  to  be  at  variance  with  the  principles  of  religion  and  morality 
prevailing  at  the  period  to  which  the  narrative  refers.  In  the 
light  of  such  principles,  the  execution  of  the  command  contained 
in  Ex.  xvii.  14  could  not  fail  to  present  itself  as  a  duty;  and 
Samuel,  who  carried  it  out,  was  only  acting  consistently  with 
current  beliefs.  The  religion  of  Jehovah  possessed  within  it  the 
germs  of  a  noble  development ;    but  its  exponents  had  not  yet 

^  That  Jael's  act  was  treacherous  is  clear  from  the  fact  that  peace  existed 
between  her  family  and  the  king  of  Hazor  {Jud.  iv.  17),  to  say  nothing  of  the 
invitation  she  tendered  to  the  fugitive  Sisera. 


RELIGION   FROM  JOSHUA  TO   DAVID    291 

divested  themselves  of  all  the  crude  and  barbarous  ideas  of  the 
early  eastern  world. 

With  the  firm  establishment  of  the  kingship  under  David,  the 
external  condition  of  Israel  changed.  The  military  successes  of 
the  son  of  Jesse  dissipated  the  dangers  to  which  the  nation  had 
been  exposed  from  its  many  hostile  neighbours;  and  so  safe- 
guarded its  religion  from  being  violently  extinguished  by  sur- 
rounding heathendom.  But  the  throne,  whilst  securing  the 
country  from  foreign  enemies,  early  threatened  danger  to  the 
life  and  liberty  of  the  subject.  Accordingly,  the  care  of  the 
prophets  was  now  turned  in  a  new  direction;  and  from  being 
the  assert  ers  of  national  rights  against  external  aggression,  they 
became  the  defenders  of  individual  rights  against  regal  tyranny. 
Thus  when  David  sacrificed  both  the  honour  of  Bathsheba  and 
the  life  of  Uriah  to  his  licentious  passion,  the  prophet  Nathan  at 
once  confronted  the  king,  and  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  denounced 
his  sin.  The  incident  is  significant  both  of  the  position  assumed 
by  the  prophets  as  guardians  of  public  morality,  and  of  the 
Divine  authority  with  which  they  believed  themselves  to  be 
invested.  It  is  not  improbable  that  on  the  occasion  of  the 
numbering  of  the  people  the  prophet  Gad  acted  a  similar  part. 
The  narrative,  indeed,  only  represents  him  as  announcing  to 
David  the  punishment  of  the  offence  for  which  his  conscience 
had  already  smitten  him ;  but  it  seems  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  king  had  first  been  brought  to  a  sense  of  his  fault 
by  the  prophet,  who  may  have  regarded  David's  conduct  either 
as  an  encroachment  upon  the  people's  Uberties,  or  as  indicating 
greater  confidence  in  his  material  resources  than  in  Jehovah. 
Further  illustrations  of  a  like  attitude  of  reproof  and  censure 
being  adopted  towards  the  reigning  sovereign  by  successive 
prophets  will  occur  subsequently ;  and  will  throw  still  fuller  light 
upon  the  character  and  claims  of  the  prophetic  order. 

But  though  the  prophets,  by  their  growing  sensitiveness  in 
matters  of  social  morality,  were  repeatedly  led  to  condemn  the 
conduct  of  particular  rulers,  they  were  not  in  general  hostile  to 
the  monarchical  principle.  The  institution  of  the  monarchy  and 
the  choice  of  Saul  to  be  the  first  king  was,  according  to  one 
account,  directly  due  to  the  far-sighted  patriotism  of  Samuel; 


292  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  the  narrative  that  represents  him  as  yielding  only  to  the 
wish  of  the  people  contrary  to  his  own  better  judgment  and  his 
sense  of  the  dangers  attending  such  a  departure,  seems  to  be 
of  inferior  authority  (see  p.  217).  And  though  dissension  subse- 
quently arose  between  Samuel  and  Saul,  it  sprang  from  the 
former's  distrust  of  the  king  and  not  from  dislike  of  his  office; 
and  the  prophet  himself  sought  another  man  to  succeed  Saul  on 
the  throne.  Between  David  and  the  prophets  Nathan  and  Gad 
cordial  relations  prevailed,  which  were  undisturbed  by  the  adverse 
judgments  passed  by  the  latter  on  certain  actions  of  their  sove- 
reign. To  this  harmony  David's  religious  character  must  have 
greatly  contributed.  But  the  prophetic  attitude  towards  the 
monarchy  by  this  time  rested  upon  a  broader  basis  than  the 
personal  qualities  of  the  individual  king.  The  success  which 
had  attended  the  reign  of  David  was,  to  the  thought  of  that 
age,  sufficient  proof  that  he  enjoyed  the  favour  of  heaven ;  and 
the  contrast  it  presented  to  the  previous  weakness  and  wretched- 
ness could  not  but  encourage  the  belief  that  it  was  under  the 
government  of  kings  like  David  that  the  nation  was  intended  by 
Divine  Providence  to  work  out  its  destiny.  The  hopes  thus 
raised  found  expression  in  more  than  one  prediction.  The 
passage  in  Gen.  xlix.  10  (dating  perhaps  from  this  time,  see 
p.  82),  which  foretells  the  fortune  of  David's  tribe  of  Judah, 
is  exceedingly  obscure,  though  as  reconstructed  from  the  LXX. 
it  seems  to  anticipate  for  the  tribe  in  the  future  a  more  extensive 
rule,  if  not  a  more  illustrious  ruler,  than  any  it  had  hitherto 
known  (see  p.  97).  But  by  the  prophet  Nathan  a  specific 
announcement  was  made  of  Divine  favours  in  store  for  David's 
own  house  and  line.  To  his  seed  who  should  be  set  up  after 
him  was  reserved  the  privilege  of  building  the  projected  Temple : 
to  him  Jehovah  would  be  a  father,  chastening  and  correcting  him 
as  a  son ;  and  his  throne  should  be  established  for  ever  {2  Sam, 
vii.  1-17)-  The  title  oi  Jehovah's  son^  applied  previously  to  the 
nation  collectively,  was  thus  appropriated  to  the  royal  house  in 
particular,  which  was  regarded  as  concentrating  m  itself  the 
privileges  and  responsibihties  of  the  people  as  a  whole.  But 
though  the  application  of  the  title  was  thus  narrowed,  it  was  still 
generic  and  not  individual     It  was  of  a  hne  of  princes,  not 


RELIGION   FROM  JOSHUA  TO   DAVID    293 

of  a  single  ruler,  that  continuance  was  predicted ;  nor  must  the 
words  used  to  describe  such  continuance  be  taken  too  literally. 
The  expression  "  for  ever  "  does  not  necessarily  signify  more  than 
"for  a  great  while  to  come"  (see  i  Sam.  i.  22,  Is.  xxxii.  14,  15) ; 
and  in  this  context  only  implies  that  the  line  of  David's  descend- 
ants was  to  be  a  long  one.  As  a  matter  of  history,  David's 
dynasty  filled  the  throne  of  Judah  for  a  space  of  400  years. 
The  passage  therefore  relates  only  indirectly  to  the  Messiah  of 
later  Jewish  hopes.  Nevertheless  it  was  from  the  experiences 
of  David's  reign  that  the  nation's  later  aspirations  mainly  took 
shape,  and  it  was  to  the  memories  of  them  that  its  thoughts 
recurred  in  times  of  adversity.  And  though  the  ultimate  realisa- 
tion in  our  Lord  of  the  Messianic  hope  departed  widely  from 
current  expectation,  and  only  fulfilled  in  a  spiritual  sense  anticipa- 
tions that  were  originally  worldly  in  character,  yet  in  one  respect 
the  event  satisfied  closely  the  conditions  of  this  early  prediction, 
inasmuch  as  Christ  was  actually  born  of  the  tribe  and  family  of 
David. 


CHAPTER  XI 
THE   REIGN   OF  SOLOMON 

Sources — i  Kg.  ii.  12-ix.  43,  2  Ch.  i.-ix. 

SCARCELY  had  David  passed  away,  when  Solomon,  who, 
though  his  precise  age  on  coming  to  the  throne  is  un- 
certain, had  probably  attained  to  full  manhood,  found  cause  to 
suspect  that  his  seat  was  not  yet  secure.  Adonijah,  who  had, 
or  believed  himself  to  have,  the  support  of  the  people  in  his 
attempt  to  obtain  the  succession  for  himself  (/  Kg.  ii.  15),  still 
brooded  over  his  disappointment;  and  he  now  addressed  to 
Bathsheba,  the  queen-mother  (a  position  both  at  this  time  and 
subsequently  of  great  dignity),^  a  petition  which  pointed  to 
a  renewal  of  the  attempt.  Maintaining  that  he  had  had  the 
favour  of  all  Israel,  though  Solomon  had  had  the  favour  of 
Jehovah,  he  asked  her  to  procure  for  him  from  his  successful 
brother  (as  though  in  compensation  for  his  baffled  hopes)  the 
Shunammite  Abishag,  who  had  comforted  the  last  days  of  David, 
to  be  his  wife.  Bathsheba,  if  she  had  any  suspicions  of  a  sinister 
purpose  underlying  the  request,  did  not  disclose  them,  but  com- 
municated the  appeal  to  Solomon.  The  king  at  once  interpreted 
it  as  indicating,  in  Oriental  fashion,  the  assertion  of  a  right  to 
the  crown;  2  and  charged  Joab  and  Abiathar  with  complicity 
in  Adonijah's  treason.  Swift  punishment  was  meted  out  to  all 
three.  Adonijah  and  Joab  were  successively  put  to  death,  the 
latter  even  at  the  altar  in  the  Tent  of  Jehovah,  to  which  he 
had  fled  for   refuge^    on   hearing   of    what   had   happened  to 

*  See  /  Kg.  XV.  x^^  Jcr.  xiii  18. 

'  Cf.  2  Sam.  xii.  8,  xvi.  21,  Hdt  iii.  68. 

«  Ct  Ex.  xxi.  14- 

294 


THE   REIGN  OF  SOLOMON  295 

Adonijah.     Abiathar  was  spared,  partly  because  of  his  sacred 

office,  and  partly  because  of  his  loyalty  to  David  when  the  latter 

was  a  fugitive;^  but  he  was  dismissed  from  the  priesthood  and 

sent  to  his  native  Anathoth.     Zadok  was  promoted  in  his  room ; 

whilst  the  command  of  the  host,  previously  held  by  Joab,  was 

given   to   Benaiah.      An    opportunity   of    carrying    out   David's 

wishes  respecting  Joab  having  been  thus  offered  and  seized,  an 

occasion   was   not  long  wanting   to   enable  those  expressed  in 

regard  to  Shimei  to  be  accomplished  also.     The  latter,  possibly 

on  suspicion  of  being  concerned  in  the  recent  plot,   was  put 

on  his  oath  2  not  to  leave  the  capital,  where  he  could  be  kept 

under   surveillance.     But  after  a  lapse  of   three   years  he  was 

incautious  enough  to  go  to  Gath,  to  recover  two  runaway  slaves ; 

and  his  visit  being  doubtless  construed  as  an  attempt  at  intriguing 

with  a  foreign  power,  he  was  at  once  executed.     These  severities 

effectually  disarmed  insubordination ;  and  Solomon's  tranquillity 

was  not  again  disturbed  by  internal  disaffection  until  a  much  later 

period. 

The  exact  age  at  which  Solomon  came  to  the  throne  is  not  mentioned 
in  the  O.T.  In  /  Chron.  iii.  5  he  is  represented  as  the  fourth  son  of 
Bathsheba  (there  called  Bathshua)  :  though  this  is  not  the  conclusion  to 
which  the  account  in  2  Sam.  xii.  24  points.  /  Kg.  iii.  7,  if  taken  strictly, 
implies  that  he  was  quite  young  ;  but  this  is  probably  hyperbole,  though 
Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  7,  8),  gives  his  age  as  fourteen.^  If,  indeed,  at  his  death, 
after  a  reign  of  forty  years,  his  eldest  son  was  forty-one  {i  Kg.  xiv.  21),  his 
age  at  his  accession  must  considerably  have  exceeded  this ;  but  Rehoboam's 
age,  there  stated,  is  probably  a  mistake  (see  i  Kg.  xii.  8  and  p.  314).  Still, 
the  politic  measures  to  which  (as  just  related)  Solomon  had  recourse  in  order 
to  meet  the  dangers  that  threatened  him  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign  suggest 
that  he  had  already  attained  to  man's  estate.  --^ 

Solomon's  reign  offers  a  striking  contrast  to  that  of  his  father. 
It  was^aTniost  entirely  devoid  of  incident,  and  was  marked  by 
none  of  the  vicissitudes  of  fortune  which  were  so  notable  a 
feature  in  the  career  of  David.  Enjoying  for  the  most  part 
peaceful  relations  with  foreign  powers,  and  set  free,  by  the  means 
just  described,  from  the  troubles  that  menaced  him  at  home, 
Solomon  was  enabled  to  devote   himself  fully  to  the  internal 

^  In  /  Kg.  ii.  26  because  thou  barest  the  Ark  .  .  .  be/ore  David  my  father  \%' 
an  erroneous  description;  the  allusion  is  doubtless  to  the  ephod  (see  /  Sam, 
xxiii.  6,  xxx.  7). 

*  So  the  LXX.  in  /  Kg.  ii.  37 ;  and  see  ver.  42. 

•  Josephus  represents  him  as  reigning  eighty  years. 


296  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

organisation  of  his  kingdom  and  the  embellishment  of  his  court 
In  particular  he  gave  much  attention  to  the  defence  of  the 
country  (including  the  construction  of  fortresses),  the  administra- 
tion of  justice,  the  development  of  trade,  and  the  erection  of  a 
national  Temple  to  the  nation's  God ;  and  in  place  of  a  chrono- 
logical narrative  of  events  (for  which  there  do  not  exist  adequate 
data)  an  account  of  the  reign  under  these  several  heads  may  be 
most  conveniently  substituted. 

I.  The  territory  over  which  sovereignty  is  claimed  for  Solomon 
by  the  historian  of  i  Kings  extended  from  the  Euphrates  to  the 
River  of  Egypt  {el  Arish),  or,  to  name  the  cities  at  the  limits 

\y^{  his  realms,  from  Tiphsah  (Thapsacus)  to  Gaza  (/  Kg.  iv.  24). 

'  But  it  may  reasonably  be  suspected  that  this  description  is  much 
exaggerated;^  and  the  account  of  his  reign  shows  that  even  his 
father's  dominions  were  not  retained  by  him  unimpaired.  For 
instance,  the  authority  over  Damascus  which  David  had  asserted 
by  placing  garrisons  there  (according  to  2  Sam.  viii.  6)  was 
quickly  lost  under  his  successor.  During  the  war  which  David 
waged  with  Zobah  {2  Sam.  viii.  3),  Rezon,  a  fugitive  from  that 
country,  escaped,  and  becoming  captain  of  a  band  of  free-lances, 
by  their  aid  made  himself  master  of  Damascus,  where  he 
eventually  founded  a  dynasty  which  was  destined  to  play  an 
important  part  in  the  history  of  Israel  during  the  next  three 
centuries  {i  Kg.  xi.  23-2 5).^  Upon  Edom,  too,  Solomon's  hold 
was  not  undisputed.  When  David  had  devastated  that  country, 
Hadad,  one  of  the  royal  family,  who  was  a  child  at  the  time, 
escaped  with  certain  of  his  father's  servants  into  Egypt.  Though 
the  reigning  Pharaoh,  Psieukhannit  (Psebkhan)  II.,  was  on 
friendly  terms  with  the  Israelite  court,  Hadad's  youth  protected 
him ;  and  when  a  new  Pharaoh  (Shishak)  came  to  the  throne,* 
the  Edomite  prince  received  as  his  wife  the  sister  of  Tahpenes, 
the  queen,  who  bore  him  a  son  called  Genubath.  The  king 
would  willingly  have  retained  him  in  Egypt ;  but  on  hearing  of 

1  The  very  turn  of  phrase  employed  in  /  ICg.  iv.  24  (see  marg.)  indicates 
that  the  passage  was  written  E.  of  the  Euphrates,  and  therefore  in  the  time  of 
the  Exile. 

2  See  /  Kg.  XV.  18,  where  Hezion  is  probably  a  mistake  for  Rezon. 

'  This  is  an  inference  from  the  probabilities  of  the  case;  /  Kg.  xL  i8,  19 
does  not  distinguish  between  the  two  Pharaohs. 


THE  REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  29; 

the  deaths  of  David  and  Joab,  he  determined  to  return  to  Edom, 
where  he  succeeded  in  recovering  the  throne,^  though  the  port  of 
Ezion-geber  at  least  remained  in  the  possession  of  the  Israelites. 
But  if  some  of  the  outlying  portions  of  David's  empire  were  lost 
by  Solomon,  the  integrity  of  the  actual  soil  of  Israel  was  secured 
alike  by  the  erection  of  fortresses  in  strong  positions  (including 
Hazor,  Megiddo,  one  or  both  of  the  Beth-horons,  and  Baalath)^ 
and  by  the  maintenance  of  a  large  force  of  war-chariots.  Of  the 
cities  selected  for  fortification,  Hazor  guarded  the  northern 
frontier,  Megiddo  protected  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  whilst  the 
Beth-horons,  with  Baalath,  commanded  the  valley  of  Aijalon, 
thus  defending  the  capital  against  an  attack  from  the  maritime 
plain.  Additional  security  in  this  direction  was  obtained  by  the 
acquisition  of  Gezer.  This  city  had  hitherto  been  left  in  the 
hands  of  the  Canaanites,  and  came  into  Solomon's  power  by  a 
marriage  alliance  with  Egypt.  Under  David  Israel  had  become 
a  factor  to  be  reckoned  with  in  Eastern  politics;  and  the  Pharaoh 
found  it  prudent  to  secure  its  friendship.  The  Pharaoh  (as 
already  implied)  was  probably  Psieukhannit  (Psebkhan)  II.,  the 
last  king  of  the  21st  dynasty,  who  had  his  capital  at  Zoan  (Tanis), 
and  ruled  over  the  Delta.  Solomon  wedded  his  daughter ; 
and  the  Egyptian  sovereign  having  attacked  and  burnt  Gezer  and 
destroyed  the  Canaanite  inhabitants,  bestowed  it  as  a  dowry  upon 
the  princess.  It  was  now  rebuilt  and  made  a  fortified  city  by 
Solomon.  In  Jerusalem  itself  additional  defences  were  con- 
structed ;  and  the  capital  was  further  adorned  by  the  erection  of 
the  Temple  and  the  royal  palaces  described  later.  In  view  of 
the  trade  route  to  the  Red  Sea,  which  the  possession  of  the 
ports  of  Edom  gave  to  Israel,  Tamar^  (perhaps  Hazezon 
Tamar)  was  likewise  fortified.     Cities  had  also  to  be  built  for 

^  So  the  LXX.  in  an  addition  made  to  /  A^.  xi.  22.  In  the  text  above  the 
section  xi.  14-22  is  treated  as  self-consistent;  but  it  really  contains  certain 
discrepancies  (for  instance  in  ver.  17  (beginning)  Hadad  in  the  original  is 
Adad,  and  in  ver.  18  the  fugitives  leave,  not  Edom,  as  implied  previously,  but 
Midian)y  so  that  some  scholars  have  suspected  that  it  has  been  constructed 
from  two  distinct  narratives  relating  respectively  to  an  Edomite  Hadad  and 
a  Midianite  Adad. 

*  I  Kg.  ix.  15-18,  2  Ch.  viii.  5-6. 

*  Cf.  EzeJi.  xlvii.  19.  2  Ch.  viii.  4  reads  Tadmor  (between  Damascus  and 
the  Euphrates),  the  later  Palmyra,  and  connects  its  fortification  with  an 
expedition  against  Hamath-Zobah. 


298  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  reception  and  support  of  the  force  of  chariots  and  cavalry 
which  the  king  maintained,^  and  which  he  seems  to  have  been 
the  first  to  introduce  into  the  armies  of  Israel.  This  force  is 
stated  to  have  consisted  of  1,400  chariots  and  12,000  horsemen 
(i  Kg.  X.  26J.  The  numbers  of  the  foot-soldiery  are  not  given, 
perhaps  because,  being  a  militia  and  not  a  standing  army,  it  was 
only  mustered  when  there  was  occasion  for  its  services ;  but  the 
levies  available  were,  no  doubt,  not  inferior  to  those  which  the 
nation  could  raise  at  the  close  of  David's  reign. 

2.  The  dispensing  of  justice  was  always  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  essential  functions  of  a  sovereign  (see  i  Sam.  viii.  20) ;  and 
it  was  David's  neglect  of  this  important  duty  which  had  afforded 
such  a  handle  to  Absalom  in  his  machinations  against  his  father.^ 
The  support  given  to  Absalom  may  have  opened  David's  eyes  to 
the  need  of  improvement ;  but  some  dissatisfaction,  no  doubt, 
prevailed  to  the  end  of  his  reign,  and  the  popularity  which 
Solomon  acquired  by  the  interest  he  took  in  the  administration 
of  justice,  as  contrasted  with  his  predecessor's  remissness,  was 
enhanced  by  the  credit  which  he  obtained  by  the  wisdom  of  his 
decisions.  Of  the  latter  an  illustration  is  afforded  by  the 
historian.  Two  harlots,  dwelling  together,  had  each  borne  a 
child ;  but  one  of  them  overlaid  her  infant,  and  on  discovering 
that  it  was  dead,  appropriated  the  child  of  her  companion  whilst 
the  latter  slept,  at  the  same  time  placing  the  dead  child  in  the 
bosom  of  the  sleeping  woman.  The  two  came  before  the  king 
to  assert  their  claims  to  the  living  child ;  and  as  there  were  no 
witnesses,  the  true  mother  was  only  detected  by  the  king's  ex- 
pedient of  giving  orders  to  divide  the  object  in  dispute.  Whilst 
the  fraudulent  claimant  assented,  the  actual  mother  preferred  to 
surrender  her  claim  rather  than  allow  her  child's  life  to  be 
sacrificed. 

3.  The  position  of  Israel,  on  the  routes  between  Egypt  on  the 
one  hand  and  the  states  of  Northern  Syria  and  the  countries 
bordering  the  upper  waters  of  the  Euphrates  on  the  other,  was 
one  so  advantageous  from  a  commercial  point  of  view  that  it  is 
not  surprising  that  a  king  of  such  practical  shrewdness  as  Solomon 

^  In  /  Kg.  iv.  26  forty  thousand  stalls  of  horses  must  be  an  error,  s  Ch. 
ix.  25  has  four  thousand.  ^  See  p.  264. 


THE  REIGN  OF  SOLOMON  299 

should  have  taken  steps  to  develop  the  trade  of  the  country  in 
several  directions.  Israel  had  many  valuable  products  of  her  own 
for  exportation,  among  them  being  wheat,  wine,  oil,  balm,  and 
honey  (of.  Ezek.  xxvii.  17);  and  in  exchange  for  these  she  could 
procure  such  articles  of  utility  or  luxury  as  her  own  soil  and 
resources  denied  her.  Unfortunately  the  occupation  of  the  coast 
by  the  Philistines  and  the  remnant  of  the  Canaanites  had  pre- 
vented the  Israelites  from  establishing  ports  of  their  own  on  the 
Mediterranean ;  and  traffic  with  the  West  was  carried  on  chiefly 
through  the  medium  of  the  Phoenician  city  of  Tyre,  The  amicable 
relations  which  Hiram  of  Tyre  had  with  David  he  maintained 
with  David's  son  and  successor.  In  return  for  a  yearly  supply  of 
corn  and  oil,  and  perhaps  wine^  (7  Kg.  v.  11,  cf  2  Ch.  ii.  lo),  he 
sent  Solomon  quantities  of  cedar  timber  (formed  into  rafts  and 
conveyed  by  sea  to  a  convenient  place 2),  as  well  as  skilled 
artificers  to  aid  him  in  his  building  projects.  In  addition  to 
this,  Hiram  enabled  the  Israelite  king  to  develop  a  maritime 
trade  on  the  Red  Sea,  access  to  which  had  been  given  him  (as 
has  been  observed)  by  his  father's  conquest  of  Edom.  At  Ezion- 
geber  (which  he  retained,  in  spite  of  the  return  to  Edom  of  prince 
Hadad)  a  ship  was  built,  similar  to  those  employed  by  the  Phoeni- 
cians in  their  voyages  to  Tarshish  (and  hence  called  Tarshish 
ships)  and  manned  in  part  by  experienced  Tyrian  sailors;  and 
from  that  port  it  was  despatched  at  intervals  of  three  years  to 
Ophir  (see  below),  bringing  back  thence  gold,^  silver,  ivory,  valuable 
woods,  and  precious  stones,  as  well  as  curious  animals  such  as 
apes  and  peacocks.  Profitable  intercourse  with  Arabia  also 
doubtless  resulted  from  the  visit  paid  to  Solomon's  court  by  the 
queen  of  Sheba  (to  be  mentioned  later),  whose  country  was  par- 
ticularly rich  in  spices.  But  besides  such  traffic  in  exports  and 
imports  (z  Kg.  x.  15),  Solomon  organised  an  important  trade  in 
chariot  horses  between  Egypt  and  the  peoples  of  Syria  and  the 
Hittites,  the  king's  agents  buying  horses  in  the  former  country, 

^  According  to  i  Kg.  v.  ii,  20,cxx)  cors  of  wheat  and  20  cors  of  oil ;  but 
for  the  latter  the  LXX.  reads  20,000  baths  of  oil ;  whilst  2  Ch.  ii.  10  adds 
20,000  cors  of  barley  and  20,000  baths  of  wine. 

^  According  to  2  Ch.  ii.  16,  Joppa. 

'  I  Kg.  ix.  28,  four  hundred  and  twenty  (LXX.  B,  one  hundred  and  twenty) 
talents ;  2  Ch.  viii.  18,  four  hundred  and  fifty  talents. 


300  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

and  selling  them  again  to  the  Syrian  and  Hittite  princes  at  an 
increased  price.  It  has,  however,  been  suspected,  not  without 
some  reason,  that  Solomon's  efforts  to  foster  foreign  trade  had  as 
its  object  more  the  gratification  of  his  own  pride  and  magnificence 
than  the  increase  of  his  people's  wealth  and  comfort..  It  is 
possible,  indeed,  that  the  enumeration  of  the  imports  brought 
into  the  country  reflects  the  ideas  of  the  historian  as  to  what  shed 
most  glory  and  lustre  upon  the  subject  of  his  narrative ;  but  as  it 
stands,  it  certainly  conveys  an  impression  not  very  favourable  to 
the  character  of  the  sovereign  who  is  credited  with  the  initiation 
and  direction  of  the  commerce. 

The  passages  relating  to  Solomon's  Tarshish  ships  and  his  trade  with  Ophir 
are  rendered  rather  obscure  by  the  uncertainty  attaching  to  the  places  indicated 
by  these  names.  If  Tarshish  is  rightly  taken  to  mean  Tartessus  in  Spain 
(see  p.  65),  the  expression  ship  of  Tarshish  must  describe  the  kind  of  vessel 
employed,  and  not  the  port  visited,  for  of  the  commodities  named  in  /  Kg. 
X.  22  as  brought  by  a  ship  of  Tarshish,  peacocks  are  not  found  in  Spain.  On 
the  other  hand  these  birds  are  products  of  India,  and  as  Ophir  was  reached 
from  Ezion-geber  on  the  Red  Sea,  it  seems  best  to  identify  Ophir  with  some 
part  of  the  Indian  coast  (perhaps  the  region  near  the  mouth  of  the  Indus)  as 
Josephus  does  {Ant.  viii.  6,  4),  and  to  regard  /  Kg.  ix.  26-28  and  x.  ii,  22 
as  referring  to  the  same  voyage.  Some  consider  the  name  Ophir  to  be 
a  comprehensive  term  for  the  south  coast  of  Asia  generally,  including  the 
Malay  peninsula.  But  other  authorities  object  to  the  identification  of  Ophir 
even  with  the  N.W.  coast  of  India  on  the  ground  of  its  distance;  and  as 
LXX.  B  in  7  Kg.  x.  22  omits  the  mention  of  peacocks,  they  would  place  the 
region  in  question  either  on  the  E.  coast  of  Africa  (Ab>'ssinia  or  Somaliland) 
or  else  in  S.  or  S.E.  Arabia.  In  favour  of  the  latter  is  the  fact  that  in 
Gen.  X.  29  Ophir  is  the  son  of  Joktan,  the  ancestor  of  several  Arabian  tribes. 

In  2  Ch.  viii.  18  the  ship  of  i  Kg.  ix.  26  appears  as  ships y  which  Hiram 
(there  written  Huram)  is  strangely  represented  as  sending  to  Ezion-geber  and 
the  neighbouring  Eloth  for  Solomon's  use. 

4.  The  high  ground,  upon  which  Jerusalem  stands  at  the 
present  day,  is  surrounded  by  valleys  on  the  E.,  S.,  and  W., 
and  is  divided  by  a  shallow  hollow  into  two  ridges,  lying  E.  and 
W.,  which  a  widening  of  the  depression  between  them  at  one 
point  converts  into  four  distinct  hills.  It  was  upon  the  N.E. 
summit  that  the  Temple,  originally  contemplated  by  David, 
was   now  built  by  his  successor.^     The  architect  was  a  certain 

*  The  topography  of  ancient  Jerusalem  is  much  disputed,  and  only  the 
principal  data  can  be  given  here.  The  present  city  stands  on  both  of  the 
ridges,  which,  united  at  the  north,  are  parted  towards  the  south  by  the 
shallow  depression  alluded  to  in  the  text.  On  the  E.  it  is  bounded  by  the 
valley  of  the  Kidron,  and  on  the  W.  by  the  valley  commonly  known  as 
the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom^  which  joins  the  former  on  the  south  of  the 


THE   REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  301 

Hiram  or  Hiram  Abi,^  who  is  described  as  the  son  of  an  Israelite 
mother  (froni  Dan  in  Naphtali)  and  a  Tyrian  father  (cf.  i  Kg. 
vii.  14,  2  ck.  ii.  13).^  The  ground  plan  of  the  building  was 
a  rectangle  measuring  80  cubits  by  30.  The  walls  were  5 
cubits  thick  at  the  base,  and  the  internal  space  enclosed  was 
consequently  70  x  20  cubits.  This  was  divided  into  three 
sections:  (i)  a  porch  (10x20)  facing  eastward;  (2)  a  central 
hall  (40  X  20) ;  (3)  an  inner  sanctuary  or  oracle  (20  x  20).  The 
height  of  these  several  sections  varied,  the  central  portion  being 
30  cubits  high,  and  the  sanctuary  20.  The  height  of  the  porch, 
according  to  2  Ch.  iiu  4,  was  120  cubits;  but  this  can  scarcely 
fail  to  be  an  error,  and  a  correction  of  LXX.  A  gives  20.  In 
front  of  the  porch  were  two  pillars  (hollow)  ^  12  (LXX.  14) 
cubits  in  circumference,  the  shafts  of  which  were  18  cubits* 
high,  surmounted  by  capitals  5  cubits  ^  high.     These  latter  were 

city.  South  of  the  eastern  ridge  was  the  pool  of  Siloanty  fed  from  the  spring 
of  Gihon  (the  modern  "Virgin's  fountain")  in  the  Kidron  valley.  The  city 
of  David  or  7Aon  certainly  occupied  the  eastern  hill,  for  its  outer  wall  was  on 
the  west  side  of  "Gihon  in  the  valley"  (see  2  Ch.  xxxiii.  14,  cf.  also  xxxii. 
30,  which  should  perhaps  be  rendered  brought  them  (the  waters  of  Gihon) 
straight  doxon^  westwards,  to  the  city  of  David),  and  the  steps  or  stairs  that 
descended  from  it  were  near  the  pool  of  Shelah  (Shiloah  or  Siloam)  (see 
Neh.  iii.  15).  The  southern  extremity  of  the  eastern  hill  was  called  Ophel, 
near  which  was  the  water  gate  (leading  presumably  from  Gihon).  On  the 
northern  portion  of  the  same  hill  stood  the  Temple,  which  was  at  first  outside 
the  ancient  city,  since  its  site  was  originally  a  threshing-floor  (see  2  Ch.  iii.  i, 
2  Kg.  iii.  I,  viii.  i,  ix,  24).  Whether  the  city  in  O.T.  times  extended  at  all 
to  the  western  hill  is  very  doubtful,  the  description  of  the  walls  in  Neh.  ii.,  iii. 
being  in  favour  of  the  view  that  it  was  altogether  confined  to  the  eastern  ridge 
(see  p,  480,  note).  In  later  times  the  central  valley  was  termed  the  Tyropceon, 
and  the  western  (as  has  been  said)  is  generally  identified  with  the  valley  of  the 
son  of  Uinnom  ;  but  if  ancient  Jerusalem  was  situated  on  the  eastern  hill  only, 
the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom  probably  designated  the  Tyropoeon  (which 
otherwise  is  not  referred  to  in  the  O.T. ).  If  this  is  the  case,  the  name  must 
have  extended  to  the  open  space  formed  by  the  junction  of  the  E.  and  W. 
valleys,  for  in  Josh.  xv.  8,  xviii.  16  En-rogel,  which  is  probably  the  modern 
Bir  Eyub,  a  well  in  this  locality,  is  associated  with  the  valley  of  Hinnom. 

To  the  conclusions  just  stated  respecting  the  site  of  the  "city  of  David" 
the  evidence  of  Josephus  is  in  contradiction,  for  he  implies  {B.J.  v.  4)  that 
the  Jebusite  stronghold  (to  which,  according  to  2  Satn.  v.  9,  the  name  of  the 
"city  of  David"  was  applied)  was  on  the  western  hill,  which  is  also  the 
higher  and  more  defensible  of  the  two. 

^  This  should  probably  be  read  for  of  Hiram  my  father'' s  in  2  Ch.  ii.  13. 

^  Since  in  /  Kg.  vii.  14  his  mother  is  termed  a  widow,  it  is  possible  that 
the  "man  of  Tyre"  was  his  stepfather. 

•  SiQtJer.  Iii.  21.  ^  In  2  Ch   iii.  15  thirty  five  cubits. 

•  So  in  7  Kg.  vii.  16,  Jer.  Iii.  22,  but  in  2  Kg.  xxv.  17  three  cubits. 


302  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

adorned  with  various  embellishments  described  as  "nets^  of 
checker  work  and  wreaths  of  chain  work,"  around  which  hung 
double  rows  of  pomegranates;  whilst  surmounting  all  were 
ornaments  termed  "capitals  of  lily  work,"  4  cubits  in  height, 
the  precise  nature  of  which  is  obscure.  These  columns  have 
been  thought  to  be  of  kindred  import  with  the  twelve  pillars 
which  Moses  erected  by  the  side  of  the  altar  at  the  foot  of 
Sinai  (see  Ex.  xxiv.  4),  and  with  the  pair  which,  according  to 
Herodotus  (ii.  44),  stood  in  the  temple  of  Heracles  (so  termed) 
at  Tyre.  To  the  two  that  fronted  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  the 
names  of  Jachin  ("  He  will  establish ")  and  Boaz  ("  in  Him  is 
strength")  were  given.  Around  the  sides  of  the  Temple  were 
built  three  stories  of  side-chambers,  each  5  cubits  high,  but 
varying  in  breadth,  the  lowest  being  5  cubits  broad,  the  next  6, 
and  the  uppermost  7,  the  increase  being  obtained  by  reducing 
the  thickness  of  the  Temple  walls.  The  entrance  into  the  lowest 
story  (so  LXX.  of  i  Kg.  vi.  8(13))  was  on  the  right  {i.e.  the  south) 
side  of  the  house.  In  the  Temple  walls  above  these  chambe  rs' 
and  consequently  at  least  15  cubits  from  the  ground,  there  were 
inserted  windows  of  lattice  work  (7  Kg.  vi.  4).  "Upper 
chambers  "  are  also  mentioned  in  2  Ch.  iii.  9  (cf.  i  Ch.  xxviii.  n) ; 
but  their  existence  seems  very  questionable.  Surrounding  the 
whole  structure  was  an  open  enclosure  ("  the  court  before  the 
House"  of  I  Kg.  viii.  64)  where  the  sacrifices  were  offered, 
and  to  which  the  people  were  admitted ;  the  dimensions  of  this 
are  not  given. 

The  Oracle  or  Most  Holy  Place  was  lined  with  cedar  and 
overlaid  with  gold.  It  was  entered  from  the  central  part  of  the 
Temple  by  folding  doors  of  olive-wood,  elaborately  carved,  across 
which  hung  chains  of  gold  (7  Kg.  vi.  32,  21),  and  before  which 
was  an  embroidered  veil  of  blue,  purple,  crimson,  and  fine  linen, 
presumably  to  screen  the  oracle  when  the  door  was  opened 
(2  Ch.  iii.  14).  This  chamber  was  intended  to  contain  nothing 
but  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  which  was  overshadowed  by  two 
figures  of  Cherubim^  carved  of  olive-wood  and  overlaid  with 
gold,  whose  extended  wings  together  stretched  across  the  oracle 
from  wall  to  wall.  In  the  main  hall  (distinguished  as  The  Holy 
^  In  /  Kg.  vii.  17  (5)  for  seven  read  two  (with  the  LXX.) ;  cf.  ver.  41. 


THE  REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  303 

Place)  were  placed  several  objects  connected  with  the  Temple 
service.  These  were,  in  addition  to  smaller  articles,  (i)  a  golden 
altar,  probably  for  the  offering  of  incense  {i  Kg.  vi.  22,  vii.  48); 
(2)  a  golden  table  ^  to  receive  the  Shewbread;  (3)  ten  golden 
candlesticks,  placed,  five  on  the  right  side,  and  five  on  the  left 
side,  of  the  door  of  the  oracle.  In  the  outer  enclosure  were 
situated  the  altar  of  burnt-offerings,  and  a  large  laver  (called  "  the 
Molten  Sea").  The  first  of  these  was  of  brass,  and  measured 
20  cubits  square,  the  height  being  10  cubits  (according  to  2  Ch. 
iv.  i).  The  space  within  was  presumably  filled  with  stone  or 
earth;  and  it  was  perhaps  approached  by  an  inclined  plane.^ 
The  "Molten  Sea"  measured  10  cubits  across  (the  circumference, 
if  the  diameter  is  stated  correctly,  being  inaccurately  given  as 
30  cubits),  and  was  5  cubits  high.  It  stood  upon  twelve  brazen 
oxen,  so  arranged  that  three  of  them  faced  each  of  the  four 
quarters  of  the  sky;  and  these  rested  upon  bases  supported  by 
wheels,  so  that  it  could  be  moved  wherever  it  was  required.  Its 
capacity  is  given  as  2,000  baths  (more  than  16,000  gallons),  though 
the  figure  is  greatly  in  excess  of  the  real  capacity  of  a  vessel 
of  the  given  dimensions  whether  its  shape  was  cylindrical  or 
hemispherical. 8  In  addition  to  this  there  were  ten  smaller  lavers, 
moving  on  wheels,  and  containing  forty  baths  (320  gallons)  each. 
All  these  receptacles  were  intended  to  hold  the  water  needed  for 
the  various  acts  of  purification  inseparable  from  the  Temple  ritual, 
the  "  Molten  Sea  "  being  for  the  ablutions  of  the  priests,  and  the 
ten  lavers  for  cleansing  the  implements  connected  with  the  burnt- 
offerings  {2  Ch.  iv.  6).  The  brass  used  in  making  the  various 
utensils  was  cast  in  a  piece  of  clay  ground  in  the  Jordan  valley 
between  Succoth  and  Zarethan  (i  Kg.  vii.  46). 

The  construction  of  the  Temple  occupied  seven  and  a  half 
years,  being  begun  in  the  second  month  of  Solomon's  fourth 
year  and  finished  in  the  eighth  month  of  his  eleventh  year.  The 
materials  of  which  it  was  built  were  hewn  and  shaped  at  a 
distance,  so  that  it  was  not  necessary  to  use  any  iron  tool  in 
putting  them  together.     When  it  was  completed,  the  Ark  of  the 

^  In  2  Ch.  iv.  8  ten  tables. 

*  Steps  to  the  altar  are  prohibited  in  Ex.  xx.  26. 

'  In  2  Ch.  iv.  5  its  capacity  is  still  greater — 3,CXX)  baths. 


304  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Covenant  of  Jehovah  was  brought  into  it,  ^  and  it  was  dedicated 

by  the  king  with  splendid  ceremonial.     The  time  chosen  was 

the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  in  the  seventh  month  of  the  following 

year,  the  festival,  as  usual,  lasting  seven  days.^     The  sacrifices 

offered  are  said  to  have  amounted  to  22,000  oxen  and  120,000 

sheep,  an  estimate  incredibly  high.     At  the  conclusion  of  the 

prayer  of  dedication,  the  king,  standing  before  the  Altar,  blessed 

the  assembled  people,  and  exhorted  them  to  walk  in  the  way 

and  keep  the  Law  of  Jehovah  their  God. 

The  account  in  /  Kg.  viii.  i-ix.  9  of  the  Dedication  of  the  Temple,  of 
Solomon's  prayer,  and  of  Jehovah's  response,  is  late.  The  language  of  the 
prayer  exhibits  many  of  the  characteristic  phrases  of  Deuteronomy ^  whilst  in 
viiL  i-ii  there  are  a  few  isolated  expressions  which  recall  the  Priestly  code 
(notably  the  distinction  in  ver.  4  between  the  Priests  and  the  Levites),  most  of 
which  LXX.  B  omits.  Some  scholars  have  thought  that  viii.  46-51,  ix.  6-9, 
which  contemplate  the  possible  captivity  of  the  nation  and  the  desolation  of 
the  Temple,  were  written  after  these  had  become  accomplished  facts,  and, 
like  the  supposed  insertions  from  the  Priestly  code,  are  of  exilic  origin. 

The  Temple  was  not  the  only  noteworthy  building  which 
Solomon  constructed.  Thirteen  years  were  spent  in  the  erectioh' 
of  a  royal  residence  which  embraced  several  distinct  structures/ 
(i)  Th€  house  of  the  forest  of  Lebanon  (so  named  from  the 
quantity  of  cedar-wood  used  in  it).  This  measured  100  x  50  x  30 
cubits,  and  rested  upon  three  rows  (so  LXX.)^  of  pillars  (each 
row  being  composed  of  fifteen  columns)  in  addition  to  the 
external  walls.  (2)  The  porch  of  pillars,  50  x  30  cubits.  (3)  7 he 
porch  of  the  throne  (to  which  the  last  mentioned  may  have  served 
as  an  ante-chamber),  forming  a  judgment  hall  where  the  king's 
throne  (of  ivory  and  gold,  with  six  lions  on  either  side,  i  Kg.  x. 
18-20)  was  placed  when  he  dispensed  justice.  (4)  T?ie  kings 
private  palace,  surrounded  by  a  court.  (5)  The  palace  of 
Pharaoh's  daughter,  probably   included   within   the  court  just 

*  In  /  Kg.  viii.  4  the  tent  of  meeting  may  be  taken  to  be  the  tent  pitched 
for  the  Ark  by  David  (2  Sam.  vi.  17,  cf.  /  Kg.  i.  39,  ii.  28),  but  in  2  Ch.  i.  3-4 
a  distinction  is  drawn  between  the  two,  the  former  (made  by  Moses  in  the 
wilderness)  being  represented  as  at  Gibeon. 

2  According  to  /  Kg.  viii.  65  (end)  the  festival  on  this  occasion  was  pro- 
longed for  an  additional  seven  days ;  but  the  statement  is  omitted  in  LXX.  B, 
and  contradicted  by  ver.  66,  which  relates  that  on  the  eighth  day  the  king 
dismissed  the  people.  2  Ch.  vii.  9,  in  harmony  with  the  Priestly  code  {LeVi 
xxiii.  36),  declares  that  on  the  eighth  day  a  solemn  assembly  was  held. 

3  The  Heb.  of  /  Kg.  vii.  2  reads /t;«r/  but  this  is  difficult  to  reconcile 
with  the  number  of  pillars. 


THE   REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  305 

named.  All  these  were  built  of  costly  hewn  stone,  the  wood 
employed  being  cedar.  They  were  in  close  contiguity  to 
the  Temple;  and  were  probably  embraced,  together  with  it, 
within  an  extensive  enclosure,  "the  great  court"  of  i  Kg.  vii.  12, 
constructed  of  three  rows  of  hewn  stone,  and  a  row  of  cedar 
beams.  From  its  situation  the  Temple  might  be  almost  regarded 
as  an  appendage  to  the  Palace;  and  so  long  as  the  "high 
places  "  throughout  the  land  were  maintained  as  seats  of  religious 
worship,  it  must  have  borne  the  character  of  a  royal  chapel  as 
much  as  gf  a  national  sanctuary. 

The  construction  of  these  edifices  and  the  establishment  of 
the  court  on  a  scale  of  magnificence  commensurate  with  them 
necessarily  involved  vast  expense  and  extensive  organisation. 
The  aid  both  in  the  shape  of  artisans  and  materials  which 
Solomon  obtained  from  Tyre  and  the  neighbouring  city  of  Gebal 
(Byblus)  could  not  be  procured  without  an  adequate  return. 
The  repayment  (as  has  been  seen)  was  made  in  part  by  means 
of  the  products  of  the  country.  It  would  appear,  however,  that 
such  were  insufficient  to  discharge  the  obligations  under  which 
Solomon  had  been  placed  by  the  Tyrian  king,  the  latter  (accord- 
ing to  I  Kg,  ix.  14)  sending  to  Solomon,  in  addition  to  timber 
and  craftsmen,  120  talents  of  gold.  The  king  of  Israel  conse- 
quently found  it  necessary  to  surrender  to  Hiram  twenty  cities 
in  Galilee,  probably  as  a  pledge.  Hiram,  however,  was  dis- 
satisfied with  them ;  and  the  name  of  one  of  them  (Cabul  in 
Asher,  see  Josh.  xix.  27),  which  resembled  a  phrase  meaning 
"good  for  nothing,"  was  applied  in  mockery  to  the  district 
in  which  they  were  situated.  But  it  was  not  foreign  labour  alone 
that  was  used  in  connection  with  the  building  of  the  Temple 
and  the  royal  palaces.  Even  of  native  Israelites  a  levy  was 
made  to  the  number  of  30,000  (i  Kg.  v.  13),  who  were  occupied 
in  cutting  timber  in  Lebanon  in  conjunction  with  Hiram's 
servants.  They  were  divided  into  three  bodies  of  10,000  men 
apiece,  under  550  officers,^  which  worked  in  turn  for  a  month  at 
a  time.  In  thus  exacting  forced  labour  from  his  own  people 
Solomon  departed  from  the  practice  of  his  father,  who  employed 
strangers  only  {i  Ch.  xxii.  2).  The  control  of  this  levy  was 
*  2  Ch,  viii,  10  two  hundred  and  fifty, 
X 


306  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

given  to  Adoniram  (or  Adoram),  who  had  previously  had  charge 
of  the  levy  of  foreigners  in  the  time  of  David  (2  Sam.  xx.  24, 
marg.). 

The  number  of  labourers  employed  by  Solomon  is  elsewhere  (/  A^.  v.  15) 
given  as  150,000,  under  3300  officers.^  The  nationality  of  these  is  not  stated 
in  Kings ;  but  in  2  Ch.  ii.  17  they  are  described  as  "strangers  that  were  in 
the  land  of  Israel,"  and  agreeably  with  this,  it  is  denied  in  /  Kg.  ix.  22, 
2  Ch.  viii.  9,  that  Solomon  made  bond-servants  of  native  Israelites.  But  this 
is  contradicted  in  /  Kg.  v.  13,  (cf.  xi.  28) ;  and  the  latter  passages  are  con- 
firmed by  the  account  of  the  acute  discontent  which  found  expression  in  the 
following  reign  (see  /  Kg.  xii.  4). 

Of  the  other  state  and  court  officials  who  had  served  David, 
only  a  few  survived  to  serve  his  son,  though  some  of  those  who 
had  been  removed  by  death  were  succeeded  in  their  duties  by 
their  children.  Benaiah,  who  in  the  reign  of  David  had  com- 
manded the  guard  of  mercenaries,  the  Cherethites  and  Pelethites 
{2  Sam.  viii.  18),  had  been  promoted  to  the  command  of  the 
host  in  place  of  Joab.  Zadok,  who  had  been  priest  in  David's 
time,  but  had  held  a  position  inferior  to  Abiathar,  took  (as  has 
been  seen)  the  place  of  the  latter  when  disgraced ;  and  when  he 
died  he  appears  to  have  been  succeeded  by  his  grandson  Azariah.^ 
Zabud,  the  son  of  Nathan,  who  is  styled  "priest  and  the  king's 
friend,"^  perhaps  occupied  a  position  analogous  to  that  of  a 
modern  ecclesiastical  Privy  Counsellor.  Elihoreph  and  Ahijah, 
sons  of  Shisha,  who  is  perhaps  to  be  identified  with  the  Sheva 
(2  Sam.  XX.  25)  or  Shavsha  (7  Ch.  xviii.  16)  who  was  scribe  in 
the  reign  of  David,  discharged  that  function  under  Solomon. 
Jehoshaphat,  son  of  Ahilud,  who  was  recorder  under  David,  re- 
tained the  position  under  his  successor.  The  steward  of  the 
household  was  Ahishar.  The  support  and  maintenance  of  the 
court  was  committed  to  a  body  of  twelve  officers,  presided  over 
by  Azariah,  another  son  of  Nathan.  Each  of  these  was  respon- 
sible for  supplies  for  one  month,  and  had  charge  of  one  of  twelve 
districts  into  which  the  country  was  divided.  In  the  division 
the  boundaries  of  the  tribes  were  to  a  certain  extent  ignored, 
perhaps   of  set   purpose,  with  a  view  to  weakening  the  tribal 

*  2  Ch.  ii.  18  three  thousand  six  hundred. 

*  The  Azariah  of  i  Ch.  vi.  9  (not  of  ver.  ID,  to  which  the  description  of 
the  High  Priest  of  Solomon's  time  has  been  erroneously  transferred). 

*  Cf.  2  Sam.  XV.  37,  xvi.  16. 


THE   REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  307 

feeling  which  had  manifested  itself  in  a  troublesome  and  even 
dangerous  form  in  the  previous  reign.  The  several  districts 
were  (i)  the  hill  country  of  Ephraim ;  (2)  Shaalbim  and  other 
parts  of  the  territory  of  Dan  and  N.W.  Judah;  (3)  Socoh  and 
part  of  the  lowland  of  Judah ;  (4)  Dor ;  (5)  the  plain  of  Esdraelon ; 
(6)  Bashan  and  N.  Gilead;  (7)  Mahanaim;  (8)  Naphtali ;  (9) 
Asher;  (10)  Issachar;  (11)  Benjamin;  (12)  S.  Gilead  (Gad).i 

Of  Solomon's  chief  state  officials,  LXX.  B  furnishes  two  lists,  which  differ 
in  some  respects  both  from  the  Hebrew  and  from  one  another.  The  same 
MS.  also  departs  from  the  Hebrew  in  its  account  of  the  officers  and  districts 
that  supplied  the  court  with  provisions. 

Of  the  names  given  in  /  Kg.  iv.  9  foil.,  several  {Ben-hur^  Bm-dcker^  Ben- 
hesed,  etc.)  are  patronymics,  the  real  names  being  lost. 

The  quantity  of  provisions  supplied  every  day  to  the  court 
(see  I  Kg.  iv.  22,  23)  implies  that  the  king  supported  a  large 
number  of  dependants.  Many  of  these  were  doubtless  foreigners 
"attached  to  the  various  princesses  whom  Solomon  wedded.  Men- 
tion has  already  been  made  of  his  marriage  with  the  daughter  of 
the  Egyptian  Pharaoh;  but  besides  her,  he  took  as  wives  and 
concubines  numerous  women  of  the  Moabites,  Ammonites, 
Edomites,  Zidonians,  and  Hittites.  According  to  the  almost  in- 
credible statement  of  J  Kg.  xi.  3,  his  wives  numbered  700  and 
his  concubines  300.2  The  maintenance  of  this  huge  harem 
must  have  entailed  a  heavy  burden  upon  the  country  at  large. 
Part  of  the  royal  revenue. was  derived  from  subject  provinces 
(cf.  I  Kg,  iv.  21  end),  and  from  the  foreign  trade  previously  ., 
described  (7  Kg.  x.  28-29);  but  it  must  have  been  largely  sup- 
plemented from  internal  sources,  to  the  serious  impoverishment 
of  the  people.  Perhaps  still  more  irksome,  if  not  actually  more 
oppressive,  was  the  system  of  the  corvee  which  the  king  (as  has 
been  said)  was  the  first  to  apply  to  his  Israelite  subjects ;  and 
before  the  end  of  the  reign,  much  sullen  dissatisfaction  began  to 
prevail  amongst  the  mass  of  the  people.  Equally  grave  must 
have  been  the  resentment  felt  by  the  more  religious  spirits  of  the 
nation  at  the  introduction  into  the  land  of  the  foreign  fbrna^pf 
worship  practised  by  Solomon's  wives.     To  gratify  the  Moabite, 

^  In  r  Kg.  iv.  19  the  description  of  this  as  being  formerly  the  territory  of 
Og,  king  of  Bashan,  is  obviously  incorrect. 

^  Compare  Rehoboam's  eighteen  wives  and  sixty  concubines  {2  Ch,  xi.  21). 


3o8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Ammonite,  and  Zidonian  princesses  whom  he  had  married,  the 
king  built  "high  places"  for  the  rites  of  Chemosh,  Milcom  (or 
Molech),  Ashtoreth,  and  doubtless  other  deities  (i  Kg,  xi.  8). 
There  was  thus  more  than  one  cause  at  work  to  produce  wide- 
spread disaffection ;  and  there  was  only  needed  a  leader  to  bring 
the  popular  discontent  to  a  head.  Such  a  leader  was  at  last" 
forthcoming  in  the  person  of  an  Ephraimite  called  Jeroboam,  the 
son  of  Nebat,  who  though  at  first  meeting  with  failure,  which  he 
did  not  retrieve  as  long  as  Solomon  lived,  ultimately  organised  a 
revolt  which  deprived  Solomon's  sob  -of >morft.  than  haJjL-of-^fe; 
kingdom. 

Of  Jeroboam's  origin  and  first  attempt  at  insurrection  the 
accounts  preserved  are  both  obscure  and  conflicting,  but  from 
a  comparison  of  them  a  few  salient  facts  emerge.  He  was  a 
native  of  Mount  Ephraim,  his  mother  Zeruah  (LXX.  Sapcto-a) 
being  according  to  one  version  a  harlot.  As  he  was  capable  and 
industrious,  he  came  under  the  notice  of  Solomon  j  and  by  him 
was  placed  in  charge  of  the  forced  labour  of  his  own  tribe.  In 
this  capacity  he  was  engaged  upon  the  king's  building  projects 
both  at  Zeredah  (LXX.  lapetpa),  which  seems  to  have  been  one 
of  the  chariot-cities  alluded  to  in  J  Kg.  ix.  19,  and  at  Jerusalem. 
The  position  which  he  occupied  as  one  of  the  officers  who  had 
direction  of  the  corvee  made  him  acquainted  with  the  popular 
grievances,  and  enabled  him  to  turn  them  to  his  own  purposes. 
The  nature  and  course  of  his  intrigues  is  not  disclosed;  but 
he  seems  eventually  to  have  been  guilty  of  some  overt  net  of 
treason,^  and  in  consequence  Solomon  sought  to  put  him  to 
death.  To  save  himself  he  fled  to  Egypt  where  Shishak^  was 
then  in  possession  of  the  throne:  and  he  remained  in  that 
country  until  Solomon's  death.  His  subsequent  proceedings 
belong  to  the  history  of  the  next  reign. 

Of  the  early  history  of  Jeroboam  there  exists,  in  addition  to  the  Hebrew 
narrative  in  /  Kg.  xi.  26-40  and  its  LXX.  rendering,  a  second  account 
preserved  only  in  the  Vatican  MS.  (B)  of  the  LXX  The  Hebrew  represents 
Jeroboam's  treasonable  designs  as  approved,  if  not  suggested,  by  the  prophet 

^  According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  7,  8)  Jeroboam  sought  to  raise  a  revolt 
and  to  induce  the  populace  to  transfer  the  sovereignty  to  him. 

*  Shishak  (Sheshonk)  was  a  Libyan,  who  acquired  considerable  power 
during  the  reign  of  the  Pharaoh  Psieukhannit  H.,  and  eventually  succeeded 


THE   REIGN   OF   SOLOMON  309 

Ahijah.  The  latter  met  him  alone  in  the  field,  and  rending  a  new  garment, 
which  he  himself  was  wearing,  into  twelve  pieces,  he  gave  ten  of  the  pieces  to 
the  young  Ephraimite,  accompanying  this  symbolic  act  by  the  declaration 
that  Jehovah  would  rend  ten  of  the  tribes  of  Israel  from  the  hand  of  Solomon's 
son,  in  consequence  of  the  king's  worship  of  heathen  deities,  and  would  give 
them  to  Jeroboam,  and  that  if  the  latter  would  obey  the  Divine  commands, 
his  house  should  be  estabhshed.  It  is  implied  that  it  was  because  of  this  that 
Solomon  sought  to  kill  Jeroboam  ;  but  the  writer  does  not  explain  how 
information  of  the  prophet's  communication  came  to  be  conveyed  to  the  king. 
The  second  Greek  version  does  not  connect  Jeroboam's  attempt  at  insurrec- 
tion during  Solomon's  lifetime  with  any  prophet ;  but  (as  will  be  seen)  it 
brings  a  prophet  into  relation  with  Jeroboam  s  subsequent  movements  after 
Solomon's  death.  This  version  describes  Jeroboam  (and  not  the  Edomite 
Hadad,  see  p.  296)  as  marrying  the  sister  of  queen  Tahpenes,  but  calls  the 
son  she  bore,  Abijah. 

Of  Solomon's  closing  years  nothing  further^  is  recorded.  His 
igign  is  stated  to  have  lasted  forty  years  ;  but  it  is  probable  that 
this  is  merely  a  round  number  employed  to  indicate  a  consider- 
able period  (perhaps  a  full  generation),  and  the  actual  duration 
of  his  rule  is  unknown.  From  the  fact  that  Adoniram  (Adoram), 
who  served  his  father  David,  lived  to  serve  his  son,  it  may 
reasonably  be  concluded  that  his  reign  fell  short  of  the  length 
ascribed  to  it  The  year  of  his  death  may  be  approximately 
fixed  between  938  and  916  B.C.,  a  date  arrived  at  (as  will  be  seen) 
from  a  consideration  of  the  number  of  years  assigned  by  the 
Bible  to  his  successors,  corrected  by  the  chronology  of  certain 
Assyrian  inscriptions. 

In  the  view  of  the  Hebrew  historian,  Solomon  was  unsurpassed 
for  sagacity  and  knowledge.  On  his  accession  to  the  crown,  it 
is  related  that  Jehovah  appeared  to  him  at  Gibeon  in  a  dream,  and 
bade  him  choose  a  boon ;  and  the  young  king,  instead  of  asking 
for  long  life  or  riches  or  success  in  war,  prayed  to  be  endowed 
with  an  understanding  heart  that  he  might  judge  the  people 
committed  to  him.  His  request  was  granted ;  and  riches  and 
honour  were  added  thereto,  with  a  promise  of  length  of  days 
if  he  kept  Jehovah's  commandments.  In  consequence  of  this 
endowment,  he  was  reputed  to  be  wiser  than  all  men;  people 
flocked  from  all  quarters  to  hear  his  wisdom;  and  the  queen 
of  Sheba,  in  particular,  came  to  prove  him  with  hard  questions.^ 

^  The  "hard  questions"  were  probably  of  the  nature  of  enigmatical  sayings 
(in  the  original  the  same  word  is  used  of  Samson's  riddle,  Jtid,  xiv.  12,  13), 
such  as  (according  to  Dius,  quoted  by  Josephus,  Ant.  viii,  5,  3)  Hiram  and 
Solomon  used  to  send  to  each  other  to  solve  for  wagers. 


3IO  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

He  was  at  once  a  philosopher  and  a  poet.  He  spake  3,000 
proverbs ;  his  songs  were  1,005  l  ^"^  ^is  utterances  embraced 
references  alike  to  the  vegetable  and  the  animal  worlds.^  So 
great,  indeed,  was  his  reputation  for  practical  insight  that  in  later 
times  the  bulk  of  the  Hebrew  Gnomic  literature  was  ascribed 
to  him.  In  the  light  of  after-events,  it  is  impossible  fully  to 
endorse  the  historian's  estimate  of  his  sagacity,  or  even  to  clear 
his  memory  from  imputations  of  criminal  folly.  To  his  oppressive, 
exactions,  in  furtherance  of  his  schemes  of  luxury  and  magnifi- 
cence, was  due  the  discontent  which  in  the  reign  of  his  son 
broke  his  kingdom  in  two,  and  ultimately  led  to  the  destruction^ 
in  detail,  of  the  Hebrew  nation  by  the  power  of  Assyria  and. 
Babylon.  It  is  clear  likewise  that,  besides  being  fond  of  display, 
he  was  voluptuous  and  sensual.  On  the  other  hand,  his  tolerance 
of  his  queens'  foreign  forms  of  worship,  which  receives  severe 
condemnation  from  the  historian,  was  probably  not  viewed 
in  quite  the  same  way  by  contemporary  IsraeHte  thought  in 
general.  The  more  zealous  prophets,  no  doubt,  regarded  it 
as  disloyalty  to  the  principles  of  the  national  faith,  and  were 
conscious  that  the  preservation  and  promotion  of  true  religion 
demanded  the  exclusion  of  all  external  cults.  But  it  is  not  likely 
that  there  existed  as  yet  any  sense  of  the  falsity  of  polytheism ; 
and  the  toleration  of  the  worship  of  Chemosh  and  other  deities 
on  the  soil  of  Israel  could  scarcely,  to  the  minds  of  that  age, 
present  itself  differently  from  the  toleration  of  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  on  the  soil  of  Syria  (as  implied  in  2  Kg.  v.  17).  And 
apart  from  the  cardinal  blunder  which  eventually  caused  the 
dismemberment  of  his  kingdom,  Solomon  was  undoubtedly  a 
powerful  and  able  monarch.  The  fact  that  his  reign  was  passed 
in  tranquilUty  (except  for  the  attempts  by  Edom  and  Damascus 
to  regain  their  independence)  testifies  to  the  care  he  displayed 
for  the  defence  of  the  realm.  That  he  showed  no  ambition 
to  undertake  foreign  conquests  redounds  to  his  credit :  after  the 
exhausting  wars  of  David  the  nation  needed  repose.     And  if  he 

^  He  probably  used  illustrations  from  them  to  give  point  to  ethical  maxims 
as  is  done  in  Prov,  vi.  6.  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  2,  5)  says  ko.Q''  IkolGtov  yap 
eUos  oivbpov  irapa^okTiv  elTev,  though  he  goes  on  to  state  ovdefxiav  tovtwv  (pvatv 
Tj-yvbrjaev  ov8^  traprikdev  dve^iraarovy  dW    iv  irdaoui   i<pi\oc6(pT]<T€y,  Kul   ttjp 


THE   REIGN   OF  SOLOMON  3". 

spent  his  people's  wealth  lavishly,  his  commercial  policy  may 
have  helped  to  produce  that  wealth,  and  perhaps  even  given 
to  the  Jewish  people  that  impulse  towards  trade  which  has  been 
for  centuries  so  marked  a  trait  in  their  character.  Nor  can  the 
indirect  effects  of  the  commerce  he  fostered  be  overlooked, 
inasmuch  as  it  brought  the  people  into  closer  contact  with  the 
outside  world  and  so  enlarged  their  intellectual  horizon.  And  in 
two  other  respects  he  profoundly  influenced  his  nation's  after- 
history  and  thereby  mankind  in  general.  In  the  first  place, 
whatever  the  burdens  which  the  construction  of  the  Temple 
entailed  upon  the  generation  that  saw  it  erected,  it  eventually 
became  the  chief  glory  of  the  Jewish  race.  To  it,  its  ritual  and 
its  associations,  was  largely  due  the  stronger  hold  which,  after 
the  disruption,  the  religion  of  Jehovah  had  upon  Judah  as 
contrasted  with  Northern  Israel;  and  when  Judah  ceased  to 
be  a  nation,  the  reconstructed  Temple  became  in  a  still  higher 
degree  the  guardian  of  the  Hebrew  faith  and  hope.  And  secondly, 
the  book  of  Proverbs^  though  parts  are  expressly  ascribed  to  other 
authors  than  Solomon  (see  xxx.  i,  cf.  xxiv.  23),  and  even  those 
sections  which  are  attributed  to  him  may  be  complex  of  origin,  is 
nevertheless  the  product  of  Solomon's  spirit  and  example,  and 
much  that  it  contains  may  actually  have  proceeded  from  him. 
And  as  Proverbs  served  as  a  model  for  many  works  of  a  similar, 
character  in  later  times,  some  of  which,  as  has  been  said,  were 
popularly  ascribed  to  him  {Ecclesiastes^  Wisdom)^  the  debt  which 
the  world  of  literature  indirectly  owes  to  the  Hebrew  king 
is  considerable.  The  works  named  do  not  exhaust  the  list  of 
productions  with  which  Solomon's  name  is  (no  doubt  erroneously) 
connected.  The  Song  of  Songs  is  attributed  to  him ;  two  of  the 
Canonical  psalms  are  entitled  his ;  and  a  book  of  Psalms  of 
quite  late  date  also  goes  by  his  name. 


CHAPTER    XII 
ISRAEL    AND    JUDAH 

Sources — (a)  i  Kg.  xii.  \-2  Kg.  xiv.  22,  2  Ch.  x.-xxv. 

(b)  2  Kg.  xiv.  23-xx.  21,  2  Ch.  xxvi.-xxxii.,  Am.^  Hos.y 
Is.  i.-xxxix./  Mic. 

(c)  2  Kg.  xxi.-xxv.,  2  Ch.  xxxiii.  i-xxxvi.  21,  Nah.^ 
Zeph.^Jer.^  Lam.^  Hab.,  Obad.,  Ezek.  i-xxxix.^ 

{d)  Ezek.  xxix.  17-21,  xl.-xlviii.,  "/j."  xiii.  i-xiv.  25., 
xxxiv.-xxxv.,  2  Is.  xl.-lxvi.,  "Jer."  x.  1-16,  1.  i- 
li.  58. 

SOLOMON'S  heir  was  his  son  Rehoboam,  whose  mother  was 
an  Ammonitess  called  Naamah,  and  described  by  one  of  the 
LXX.  versions  as  the  daughter  of  Hanun,  son  of  Nahash,  the 
king  of  Ammon.  On  the  death  of  his  father,  the  young  prince 
(according  to  the  LXX.  of  i  Kg.  xii.  24a,  ed.  Swete,  he  was  only 
sixteen  years  of  age)  ascended  the  throne  without  opposition  at 
Jerusalem.  It  was  otherwise  among  the  tribes  of  the  centre  and 
the  north.  These  felt  acutely  the  burdens  involved  in  the  con- 
tributions required  for  the  king's  table,*  and  in  the  system  of 
forced  labour  which  had  been  imposed  upon  them,  whilst  they 
did  not  share  to  the  same  extent  as  Judah  in  the  lustre  which 
Solomon's  architectural  triumphs  and  splendid  court  shed  upon 
the  capital.  Ephraim,  in  particular,  must  have  been  the  more 
aggrieved  from  the  fact  that  it  had  once  enjoyed  a  pre-eminence 
which,  under  the  dynasty  of  David,  it  no  longer  possessed.     The 

1  Omitting  xiii.  i-xiv.  23,  xxiv.-xxvii.,  xxxiv.-xxxv.;  see  ItUrod.  p.  22-3. 

2  Omitting  x.  I-16,  1.  i-Ii.  58 ;  see  p.  23. 
5  Omitting  xxix.  17-21  ;  see  p.  24. 

*  See  the  LXX.  of  /  Kg.  xii.  16  vvv  ^bcKt  rhv  oUdy  aov,  Aavld, 

312 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  313 

opportunity  which  thus  presented  itself  of  again  working  upon 
the  popular  disaffection  was  seized  by  the  exile  Jeroboam,  who, 
on  hearing  of  Solomon's  death,  at  once  left  Egypt  for  his  native 
land.  Returning  to  his  home  at  Zeredah  (LXX.  '2ap€Lpa),  where 
there  mustered  to  him  his  own  tribe,  he  constructed  a  fortifica- 
tion there  as  a  place  of  defence  in  the  last  resort ;  and  then  pro- 
ceeded to  gather  together  an  assembly  of  the  people  at  Shechem. 
Whilst  there  he  was  met  by  a  certain  prophet,  Shemaiah  by  name, 
who  was  wearing  a  new  robe;  and  the  prophet,  tearing  his 
garment  into  twelve  pieces,  gave  ten^  of  them  to  Jeroboam, 
to  symbolise  the  bestowal  upon  him  by  Jehovah  of  ten  of 
the  twelve  tribes.  There  was  still  sufficient  cleavage  between 
Judah  and  the  rest  of  the  nation  to  make  it  necessary  for  the 
successor  of  the  deceased  king  to  have  his  authority  over  the 
northern  tribes  formally  acknowledged ;  and  it  was  to  Shechem 
that  Rehoboam  came  to  procure  the  confirmation  of  his 
sovereignty.  There  a  resolve  was  taken  by  the  people,  pre- 
sumably at  the  instigation  of  Jeroboam,  to  obtain  a  redress  of 
the  grievances  from  which  they  suffered;  and  a  petition  was 
presented  for  a  relaxation  of  the  burdens  inflicted  upon  them  by 
Solomon.  Before  replying  Rehoboam  first  sought  the  advice  of 
the  aged  counsellors  of  his  father,  who,  realising  the  situation, 
recommended  him  to  consent  to  the  people's  demands ;  but  on 
consulting  a  body  of  younger  advisers  to  whom  he  was  attracted 
by  equality  of  age  and  similarity  of  training,  he  was  urged  to 
adopt  a  firm  attitude,  and  to  dismiss  the  petitioners  with  expres- 
sions of  insolent  scorn.  He  followed  their  advice ;  and  his  reply 
was  the  signal  for  a  renunciation  of  allegiance  on  the  part  of  the 
bulk  of  the  nation.  An  attempt  to  enforce  the  customary  levy 
ended  in  the  death  of  Adoniram  (or  Adoram),  the  officer  con- 
cerned, who  was  stoned;  and  Rehoboam  had  to  flee  to  Jerusalem. 
Jeroboam  thus  found  himself  the  successful  leader  of  a  popular 
cause ;  and  it  was  natural  that  the  thoughts  of  the  seceding  tribes 
should  turn  to  him  when  the  time  came  to  choose  a  rival 
sovereign.  He  was  accordingly  raised  to  the  throne ;  and  hence- 
forward the  Hebrew  people  were  divided  into  two  kingdoms, 
known  generally  as  Israel  zxid.  Judah  (z  Kg.  xii.  1-20,  2  Ch.  c.  x.). 

^  The  LXX.  of  /  Kg.  xii.  24°  has  (by  mistake)  5u>5e/ca  prfyfiara. 


314  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

In  the  above  account  the  second  narrative  of  the  LXX.,^  which  departs  from 
the  Hebrew,  has  been  followed,  as  it  places  the  events  in  their  most  natural 
sequence.  This  version,  which,  as  has  been  said  (see  p.  309),  represents  Jero- 
boam as  marrying  the  sister  of  Tahpenes,  also  relates  that  after  Jeroboam 
had  returned  from  Egypt,  but  prior  to  the  assembly  at  Shechem,  his  little  son 
fell  sick  ;  whereupon  he  sent  his  wife  to  Shiloh  to  enquire  of  the  prophet 
Ahijah  there  whether  he  would  recover.  As  she  approached  the  city 
Ahijah,  who  was  blind,  sent  to  meet  her  and  told  her  that  as  soon  as  she 
returned  home,  her  maidens  would  come  forth  to  inform  her  that  the  child 
was  already  dead.  The  narrative  then  strangely  goes  on  to  say  that  the 
prophet  predicted  the  extirpation  of  Jeroboam's  family,  adding  that  the  sick 
child  alone  should  receive  the  rites  of  mourning,  for  in  him  only  was  good 
found.  This  account  of  a  visit  to  Ahijah  is  a  variant,  inferior  in  value,  of 
that  given  in  /  Kg,  xiv.  with  reference  to  an  occasion  after  Jeroboam's 
accession  to  the  throne,  for  the  denunciation  of  woe  against  his  house  is 
manifestly  out  of  place  before  he  had  become  king  or  had  caused  Israel  to  sin. 

The  Hebrew  narrative  in  c  xii.  is  inconsistent,  for  whereas  in  ver.  3a 
it  states  that  Jeroboam  was  summoned  home  from  Egypt  by  the  people,  and 
in  ver.  20  implies  that  the  people  only  heard  of  his  return  after  the  interview 
with  Rehoboam  at  Shechem,  in  ver.  3b,  12  his  presence  at  Shechem  is 
expressly  asserted. 

Rehoboam's  age  at  his  accession  is  given  by  the  Heb.  of  xiv.  21  as  forty- 
one,  but  this  does  not  agree  with  the  impression  produced  by  xii.  8 :  c£ 
also  2  Ch,  xiil  7. 

The  kingdom  of  Israel,  as  now  constituted,  nominally  com- 
prised ten  of  the  twelve  tribes,  which  were  Joseph,  Simeon, 
Benjamin,  Dan,  Issachar,  Asher,  Zebulun,  Naphtali,  Gad,  and 
Reuben.  The  kingdom  of  Judah,  as  the  title  indicates,  was 
composed  mainly  of  the  tribe  of  that  name;  but  it  must  also 
have  practically  included  Simeon.  The  frontier  between  the 
two  kingdoms,  moreover,  fluctuated  a  good  deal;  and  the 
territory  of  Benjamin  was  really  divided  between  them,  the  city 
of  Jerusalem  being  naturally  retained  by  the  Judaean  sovereigns, 
whilst  Bethel  and  Jericho  fell  to  their  rivals.  Dan  also  seems  to 
have  been  partly  Judaean,  for  Aijalon,  a  Danite  city  {Josh.  xix. 
42),  remained  in  the  hands  of  Rehoboam  {2  Ch.  xi.  10).  Of  the 
vassal-states,  sovereignty  over  Edom  was  asserted  at  intervals  by 
Judah,  whilst  Moab  was  dominated  by  Israel. 

Two  states  so  closely  connected  both  by  hneage  and  situation 
as  were  Israel  and  Judah  could  not  fail  to  affect  each  other's 
careers  most  seriously  either  for  good  or  evil ;  and  their  fortunes 
may  be  conveniently  considered  together.  The  interest  of  the 
first  century  of  their  united  history  is  mainly  centred  in  theii 
mutual  relations  with  each  other,  and  the  relations  of  both  with 
»  See  p.  308. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  315 

the  Syrians  of  Damascus.  A  natural  desire  on  the  part  of  the 
kings  of  Judah,  inheriting  as  they  did  the  city  and  throne  of 
David,  to  recover  the  territories  once  attached  to  that  throne,  led 
to' a  succession  of  wars  between  the  two  nations  which  lasted  for 
more  than  a  generation.  This  attitude  of  hostility,  however, 
gradually  gave  way  to  more  friendly  feelings  as  the  memory  of 
a  past  grievance  began  to  fade ;  and  in  the  reigns  of  Ahab  and 
Jehoshaphat  the  two  kingdoms  were  in  alliance,  though,  as  will 
appear,  Israel  was  the  paramount  power.  Syria,  which  was  in 
turn  the  supporter  of  each  against  the  other,  was  by  her  position 
a  more  serious  rival  to  Israel  than  to  Judah;  and  when  the 
mutual  relations  of  the  two  latter  became  more  amicable,  Israel 
obtained  Judah's  aid  to  attack  her  most  formidable  enemy.  On 
the  west  and  south-west,  the  territory  of  both  the  Hebrew  peoples 
adjoined  that  of  the  Philistines ;  and  these,  after  having  re- 
mained tranquil  during  the  last  years  of  their  conqueror  David 
and  through  the  reign  of  his  son,  once  more  began  to  move, 
though  they  did  not  prove  particularly  dangerous  to  either  Israel 
or  Judah.  Moab,  which  after  the  division  of  Solomon's  king- 
dom fell,  as  has  been  observed,  to  Israel,  subsequently  revolted, 
and  a  long  series  of  border  campaigns  ensued  between  the 
Moabites  and  their  former  lords.  Judah's  most  important  wars, 
next  to  those  she  was  involved  in  with  her  northern  neighbour, 
were  with  Edom,  which,  after  beginning  a  struggle  for  its  inde- 
pendence as  early  as  the  time  of  Solomon,  eventually  succeeded 
in  obtaining  it. 

The  internal  history  of  Israel  and  Judah  during  this  period 
differed  considerably.  The  former,  from  its  extent,  was  naturally 
less  homogeneous  than  the  latter,  and  was  in  consequence  more 
disturbed  by  the  spirit  of  faction.  Its  history  was  marked  by 
repeated  dynastic  changes,  due  in  many  instances  to  the  personal 
ambition  of  able  and  unscrupulous  officers,  who  rose  against 
incapable  princes.  Religious  strife  was  also  a  feature  in  the 
career  of  the  northern  kingdom.  The  generally  low  level  of 
the  Jehovistic  worship  which  prevailed  in  it,  and  the  introduction 
into  it,  through  the  influence  of  the  neighbouring  Zidon,  of  the 
religion  of  the  Phoenician  Baal,  roused  the  fierce  antagonism 
of  the  more  faithful  of  the  prophets  of  Jehovah ;  and  more  than 


3i6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

one  of  the  revolutions  which  took  place  seems  to  have  been 
abetted,  if  not  instigated,  by  them.  On  the  other  hand,  Judah 
was  remarkably  free  from  revolutions  or  usurpations.  This  was, 
no  doubt,  due  in  part  to  the  personal  qualities  of  some  of  its 
early  sovereigns ;  but  in  part  also  to  the  affection  and  reverence 
felt  by  the  people  towards  the  house  of  David.  The  character 
of  the  prevalent  religion,  too,  was  purer  than  that  of  Israel,  a 
result  to  which  the  existence  of  Solomon's  Temple,  and  the 
priesthood  attached  to  it,  must,  as  already  remarked,  have 
greatly  contributed.  In  the  8th  century,  one  of  the  two  prophets 
who  addressed  themselves  to  Israel  went  thither  from  Judah; 
and  though  he  found  much  to  censure  in  his  own  country, 
it  is  manifest  from  his  utterances  that  its  moral  and  rehgious 
condition  was,  on  the  whole,  superior  to  that  of  its  neighbour 
(see  p.  354). 

After  the  reign  of  Ahab  of  Israel,  the  principal  feature  of  the 
history  of  the  next  two  centuries  is  the  growing  predominance 
in  the  politics  of  Palestine  of  the  empire  of  Assyria.  The 
hostile  attitude  of  Israel  and  Syria  towards  one  another  con- 
tinued, indeed,  for  a  time;  but  the  fortunes  of  the  war  were 
largely  affected  by  Assyrian  pressure  upon  one  or  other  of  the 
combatants ;  and  eventually  the  two  foes  had  to  combine  in 
a  futile  effort  to  defend  themselves  against  their  common  enemy. 
Another  actor  on  the  political  stage  during  the  latter  portion 
of  this  period  was  Egypt,  who,  foreseeing  the  contest  for 
supremacy  in  the  West  with  which  Assyria  threatened  her, 
began  to  encourage  the  Palestinian  states  with  hopes  of  support 
against  the  encroaching  eastern  power — hopes  which  only  be- 
trayed those  who  trusted  to  them.  Northern  Israel,  under  some 
of  the  kings  of  Jehu's  dynasty,  for  a  time  enjoyed  a  considerable 
measure  of  prosperity;  but  when  the  last  of  this  line  fell  be- 
neath an  assassin,  the  country  became  a  prey  to  anarchy,  and 
the  end  soon  came.  Judah,  on  the  other  hand,  though  im- 
perilled and  despoiled  by  Assyria,  outlasted  the  sister  kingdom 
by  nearly  150  years;  and  even  survived  to  witness  the  downfall 
of  the  Assyrian  empire  itself. 

This  final  period  of  a  century  and  a  half  which  elapsed 
between  the  overthrow  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  and  the  de- 


ISRAEL  AND   JUDAH  317 

struction  of  Jerusalem  was  marked  by  the  rise  of  Babylon, 
before  which  Assyria  eventually  fell.  Of  Babylon,  Egypt  became 
the  persistent  opponent,  as  she  had  previously  been  of  Assyria; 
and  in  consequence  posed  as  the  friend  of  Judah  against  her 
formidable  foe.  Internally  the  history  of  Judah  becomes  a 
record  of  alternate  reformations  and  reactions,  the  deterioration 
in  religion  and  morality  ultimately  advancing  without  check, 
till  the  prophets  came  to  see  that  the  severest  of  national 
chastisements  was  a  necessary  condition  of  their  race's  spiritual 
salvation. 

A  list  is  subjoined  of  the  contemporary  kings  of  Israel  and 
Judah ;  and  to  the  names  of  some  of  them  are  attached  notices 
of  certain  events  of  known  date  that  occurred  during  their 
reigns,  from  which  a  general  idea  of  the  chronology  of  the 
time  may  be  gained.  The  dates  are  derived  in  the  main  from 
the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  which  in  regard  to  chronology  may 
with  good  reason  be  considered  trustworthy,  as  the  Assyrians 
paid  great  attention  to  the  subject,  and  had  a  special  officer 
appointed  annually,  who  gave  his  name  to  the  year  (like  the 
Archon  Eponymus  at  Athens).  If  to  the  first  of  the  figures  thus 
obtained  (854  B.C.),  which  falls  within  Ahab's  reign,  there  is 
added  the  sixty-two  years  covered,  according  to  the  O.T.,  by  the 
reigns  of  his  predecessors,  the  accession  of  Jeroboam  is  fixed  for 
916  B.C. ;  whilst  if  the  sixty-two  years  just  mentioned  be  increased 
by  the  twenty-two  years  of  Ahab's  own  rule  (on  the  assumption 
that  854  was  nearer  the  end  than  the  beginning  of  his  reign), 
the  date  of  Jeroboam's  usurpation  becomes  938  B.C. ;  and 
between  these  two  limits  the  Disruption  may  be  approximately 
placed.  Attempts  to  determine  with  greater  precision  both  the 
date  of  this  event  and  the  year  of  the  accession  (with  the  con- 
sequent duration  of  the  reigns)  of  the  several  kings  of  the 
Divided  Monarchy  do  not  command  confidence.  The  numbers 
furnished  by  the  Hebrew  historians  are  in  many  instances  incon- 
sistent both  with  each  other  and  with  the  information  preserved 
in  the  inscriptions ;  and  it  has  accordingly  not  been  deemed 
worth  while  to  construct  a  scheme  resting  upon  such  an  insecure 
foundation. 


3i8 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


ISRAEL. 

Jeroboam  I. 


Nadab 
Baasha 
Elah 
Zimri 
( Tibni 
t  Omri 
Ahab 


Ahaziah 
Jehoram 


Jehu 


Jehoahaz 
Joash 

Jeroboam  II. 

Zechariah 

Shallum 

Menahem 

Pekahiah 
Pekah 


Hoshea 


JUDAH. 

Rehoboam 
Abijah  (Abijam) 
Asa 


Events  of  Known  Date, 


Jehoshaphat 

Jehoram 
Ahaziah 
Athaliah 

Joash 

Amaziah 
Uzziah  (Azariah) 


Jotham 
Ahaz 


In  854  Ahab's  troops  were 
present  at  the  battle  of 
Karkar.i 


In  842  Jehu  paid  tribute  to 
Shalmaneser  II.* 


>  Sec  p.  335.  «  See  p.  347. 


In  738  Menahem  paid  tribute 
to  Tiglath  Pileser.s 


In  734  Pekah  was  dethroned, 
and  Hoshea  appointed  in 
his  place  by  Tiglath  Pileser, 
to  whom  Ahaz  paid  tribute.* 

»  See  p.  358.  <  See  p.  362. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH 


319 


ISRAEL.                       JUDAH. 

Events  of  Known  Date. 

Hezekiah 

In  722  Samaria  was  taken  by 

Sargon.^ 

In  701  Judah  was  invaded  by 

Sennacherib.  2 

Manasseh 

Paid  tribute  to   Ksarhaddon 

(681-668)  and  to  Asshur- 

banipal  (668-626).3 

Amon 

Josiah 

Defeated     at     Megiddo    by 

Pharaoh    Necho    (610- 

594)> 

Jehoahaz 

Jehoiakim 

In  605  battle  of  Carchemish 

between  Egypt  and  Babylon 

Jehoiachin 

Zedekiah 

In  586  Jerusalem  was  captured 

by  Nebuchadrezzar   (604- 

561)-' 

The  following  table  gives  the  duration  of  the  reigns  of  the  Israelite  and 
Judoean  monarchs,  and  the  synchronism  between  them  as  stated  in  Kings.  In 
general  the  last  year  of  a  reign  is  likewise  reckoned  as  the  first  of  the  suc- 
ceeding reign,  but  in  some  cases  the  principle  seems  to  have  been  departed 
from  ;  and  in  consequence  of  this,  and  of  miscalculations,  a  number  of  errors 
have  crept  in.  Some  of  the  contradictory  statements  made  by  the  Hebrew 
historian  are  indicated  in  the  notes. 


ISRAEL. 

JUDAH. 

' 

Yearof 

Length 

'' 

Yearof 

Length 

Name. 

Reign. 

o/Reign. 

Name. 

Reign. 

o/Reign. 

Jeroboam  I 

I 

... 

Rehoboam 

I 

It 

18 

... 

tAbijah 

I 

17 

•> 

20 

... 

\Asa" 

X 

3 

Nadab 

I 

"}   ••• 

>} 

2 

>> 
Baasha 

X 

1- 

t» 

3 

Elah 

I 

24\ 

t> 

26 

I 

See  p.  363. 

a  See  p. 

370.                » 

See  p.  374. 

4 

See  p.  380. 

»  See  p. 

386. 

320 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


ISRAEL. 

Jt 

fDAH. 

Year  of 

Length 

/" 

Vearo/ 

Length 

Name. 

Reign. 

of  Reign. 

Name. 

Reign. 

of  Reign. 

Elah 

^1 

Zimri 

7  days  \ 

... 

Asa 

^^ 

Omri 

I 

J 

... 

a 

27 1 

Ahab 
>i 

Ahaziah 

... 

\Jehoshaphat 
11 

38 

I 
17 

41 

Jehoram 

2| 

... 

■f 

Jehoram 

i82 

25 

ti 

... 

I 

>» 

12  « 

... 

/       » 

\  Ahaziah 

8 

I 

Jehu 

Athaliah 

I 

\Jehoash 

6(7) 

i> 

28 

... 

I 

Jehoahaz 

: 

... 

it 

23 

>> 

Joash 

K 

)> 

Jeroboam  ] 

[I.              I 

J 

... 

1  " 

\Amaziah 
>> 

37 

I 
15 

40 

» 

27 

... 

l.U/7,iah  (Azariah)    i 

29 

Zechariah 

0  mo.  J 

... 

n                  » 

38 

Shallum 

I  mo.\ 

39 

Menahem 

J 

•*• 

M                       » 

Pekahiah 

io\ 

... 

II                       M 

50 

Pekah 

2\ 

... 

l»                       l> 
»>                       »» 

52 

52 

M 

Jotham 

I 

i6 

!• 

17 

... 

[Ahaz 

X 

Hoshea 

^1 

... 

If 

12 

tf 

... 

JHezekiah 

I 

16 

>i 

(Samaria  taken)       9 

.». 

i» 

6 

^  So  implied  in  /  Kg.  xvi.  15,  16,  but  in  ver.  23  in  the  thirty  and  first 
year  of  Asa. 

2  So  in  2  Kg.  iii.  i ;  but  in  i.  17  in  the  second  year  of  Jehoram  the  son  of 
Jehoshaphat. 

'  So  in  ^  Kg.  viii.  25,  but  in  ix.  29  in  the  eleventh  year  ofjoram  { Jehoram), 

*  Ct  *  Kg.  xi.  3  with  ver.  4. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH 


321 


JUDAH. 

Length  of 

Name, 

Reign. 

Hezekiah 

.      29 

Manasseh 

.     55 

Amon 

2 

Josiah 

•           •      ?' 

Jehoahaz 

.  3  months 

Jehoiakim 

II 

Jehoiachin 

.  3  months 

Zedekiah 

.      II 

Jerusalem  taken  586  B.C. 

As  Jehoram  of  Israel  and  Ahaziah  of  Judah  were  killed  at  the  same  time 
by  Jehu,  the  sums  of  the  reigns  of  the  Israelite  and  Judsean  kings  up  to  this 
date  ought  to  be  equal ;  but  in  point  of  fact  there  is  a  difference  of  three 
years  (Israel  98,  Judah  95).  Similarly  the  sum  of  the  reigns  in  the  same  two 
lines  of  kings  from  the  accession  of  Jehu  and  Athaliah  to  the  fall  of  Samaria 
in  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah  should  be  equal ;  but  between  them  there  is  a 
difference  of  more  than  twenty-one  years  (Israel,  143  years,  7  months  ;  Judah, 
165  years).  Moreover,  as  has  been  said,  the  dates  implied  by  these  tables  do 
not  tally  with  those  ascertained  from  the  Assyrian  inscriptions.  Since  Ahab 
fought  in  alliance  with  the  Syrians  at  Karkar  in  854,  he  cannot  have  met  his 
death  in  conflict  with  them  before  853.  But  in  842,  only  eleven  years  after- 
wards, Jehu  was  king ;  and  this  interval  of  eleven  years  has  to  include  the 
reigns  of  Ahaziah  and  Jehoram.  These  two  kings,  therefore,  cannot^  have 
ruled  for  the  fourteen  years  represented.  Again,  since  Menahem  was  king  of 
Israel  in  738,  and  Samaria  was  captured  in  722,  the  interval  of  sixteen  years 
must  cover  the  reigns  of  Pekahiah,  Pekah,  and  Hoshea,  which  are  therefore 
likewise  over-estimated  (thirty-one  years  in  all)  by  the  writer  of  2  Kings. 
Again,  some  of  the  figures  given  in  connection  with  the  kings  of  Judah, 
Ahaz  and  Hezekiah,  are  inconsistent  with  the  dates  of  events  preceding  or 
following  them.  On  the  one  hand,  the  fall  of  Samaria  in  722  is  said  to  have 
happened  in  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  according  to  2  Kg.  xviii.  10,  which 
makes  727  the  year  of  his  accession.  But  if  Hezekiah  was  on  the  throne  in 
727,  and  Jotham  his  grandfather  was  contemporary  with  Pekah  of  Israel 
(2  Kg.  XV.  32),  who  reigned  after  738  (which  fell,  as  shown  above,  in  the 
reign  of  his  predecessor,  Menahem),  Ahaz,  who  came  between  Jotham  and 
Hezekiah,  cannot  have  reigned  the  sixteen  years  ascribed  to  him.  On  the 
other  hand,  2  Kg.  xviii.  13  places  Sennacherib's  invasion  of  701  in  Hezekiah's 
fourteenth  year,  and  therefore  his  accession  in  714.  But  this,  whilst  affording 
more  space  for  the  reigns  of  his  immediate  predecessors,  conflicts  with  the 
figures  given  for  those  of  his  successors,  for  between  714  and  605,  the  date  of 
the  battle  of  Carchemish  in  Jehoiakim's  fourth  year  (jer.  xlvi.  2),  the  interval 
is  only  109  years,  whereas  the  sum  of  the  reigns  of  Hezekiah,  Manasseh, 
Amon,  and  Josiah  amounts  to  117  years. 

One  of  the  first  acts  oi  JEROBOAM^  on  ascending  the  throne 
was  to  increase  the  defences  of  his  kingdom.  Leaving  his  native 
Zeredah,  he  made  Shechem,  in  the  pass  between  Ebal  and 
Gerizim,  his  capital,  and  fortified  it,  though  subsequently  he 
appears  to  have  transferred  his  court  to  Tirzah  (see  i  Kg.  xiv.  17), 

^  The  names  of  the  kings  of  Israel  are  distinguished  from  those  of  the 
kings  of  Judah  by  being  printed  in  italics. 
Y 


322  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

which,  at  a  later  date,  displaced  Shechem  as  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment (7  Kg.  XV.  33,  xvi.  9).  To  protect  the  district  E.  of  the 
Jordan  he  Ukewise  fortified  Penuel,  not  far  from  Succoth.  If  he 
maintained  his  friendly  relations  with  Egypt,  it  may  be  assumed 
that  he  used  his  influence  to  the  prejudice  of  his  rival  Rehoboam, 
and  that  his  machinations  had  something  to  do  with  the  invasion 
of  Judah  by  Shishak  (to  be  mentioned  shortly).  But  in  strengthen- 
ing himself  against  the  expected  hostility  of  the  Southern  King- 
dom, he  did  not  rely  upon  material  resources  only.  He  knew 
the  attraction  which  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  would  have  for  the 
religious  spirits  of  the  nation ;  and  consequently  he  proceeded  to 
establish  rival  seats  of  worship.  The  chief  of  these  were  Bethel 
and  Dan,  at  the  two  extremities  of  his  dominions.  Both  had 
been  sanctuaries  since  the  time  of  the  Judges ;  and  at  Dan 
Jehovah  had  previously  been  worshipped  through  the  medium 
of  an  image.  In  each  of  these  Jeroboam  now  placed  a  calf  of 
gold  to  represent  the  God  of  Israel,  following  the  example  set 
by  Aaron  in  the  Wilderness.  The  festival  of  Ingathering  (Taber- 
nacles) observed  in  Judah  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  the  seventh 
month  was  in  the  Northern  Kingdom  directed  to  be  kept  a  month 
later,  on  the  fifteenth  of  the  eighth  month  (presumably  because 
the  harvest  was  not  so  early  as  in  S.  Palestine).  Jeroboam,  how- 
ever, did  not  adopt  the  practice,  which  was  probably  now  be- 
ginning to  obtain  in  Judah,  of  confining  the  priesthood  to 
members  of  the  tribe  of  Levi,  but,  instead,  made  priests  from 
all  the  tribes  without  distinction.  Both  in  this  and  in  the 
maintenance  of  a  plurality  of  sanctuaries  he  was  only  following 
precedent.  As  has  been  shown  in  a  previous  chapter,  the  prior 
history  negatives  the  belief  that  worship  had  hitherto  been  re- 
stricted to  a  single  shrine,  or  priestly  duties  to  a  single  tribe.^ 
And  even  the  adoration  of  Jehovah  under  a  material  emblem, 
though  contrary  to  the  second  "word"  of  the  Decalogue,  and 
probably  to  the  teaching  of  Moses,  was,  as  already  indicated,  not 
unexampled.  The  unqualified  condemnation,  therefore,  which 
in  the  books  of  Kings  is  passed  on  Jeroboam,  may  perhaps  be 
taken  to  represent  the  judgment  of  a  later  generation  rather  than 
that  of  contemporary  thought  generally. 

*  Contrast  2  Ch.  xi.  14-16. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  323 

In  I  Kg,  xiii.,  indeed,  Jeroboam's  action  is  described  as  receiving  im- 
mediate censure  from  a  prophet.  There  it  is  related  that  when  the  king  was 
burning  incense  on  the  altar  at  Bethel,  he  was  confronted  by  a  man  of  God 
from  Judah,  who  declared  that  a  descendant  of  David,  Josiah  by  name, 
should  eventually  defile  the  altar  by  sacrificing  upon  it  the  priests  of  the 
"high  places"  ;  and  as  a  warranty  for  the  truth  of  his  words,  announced  that 
the  altar  before  them  should  be  rent  and  its  ashes  poured  out.  His  announce- 
ment was  fulfilled;  and  the  king  in  attempting  to  arrest  him,  found  his  arm 
dried  up  and  helpless,  and  only  recovered  its  use  on  the  intercession  of  the 
prophet.  The  latter,  when  invited  to  share  the  king's  hospitality,  decUned  it 
on  the  ground  that  he  had  been  divinely  forbidden  to  eat  or  drink  in  the 
impious  land  ;  but  after  his  departure,  an  old  prophet,  who  resided  in  Bethel, 
overtook  him,  and  by  professing  to  have  received  a  divine  commission  to 
entertain  him,  brought  him  back  to  eat  bread.  After  the  meal,  the  old 
prophet  foretold  his  death  as  a  punishment  for  his  disobedience,  and  he  was 
slain  by  a  lion^  on  his  homeward  journey.  The  narrative  presents  many 
difficulties.  Both  the  prophets  are  nameless ;  the  precision  with  which  the 
name  of  the  king  destined  to  accomplish  the  prediction  respecting  the  altar  at 
Bethel  some  3CX)  years  afterwards  is  given,  is  hardly  to  be  paralleled  ;  and  the 
mention  of  the  "cities  of  Samaria"  (ver.  32)  is  an  anachronism  (see  /  Kg. 
xvi.  24).'*  The  fulfilment  of  the  recorded  prediction  is  recounted  in  2  Kg. 
xxiii.  15-20  (see  p.  376). 

Jeroboam's  institution  of  the  calf-images  is  also  related  (c.  xiv.  1-18)  to 
have  been  denounced  by  the  prophet  Ahijah.  On  the  occasion  of  the  sickness 
of  one  of  Jeroboam's  sons,  his  queen  was  sent  from  Tirzah  to  Shiloh  to  con- 
sult the  prophet  as  to  the  prospect  of  his  recovery.  The  queen,  taking  a 
present  with  her,*  went  disguised  ;  but  Ahijah,  though  blind  by  reason  of  his 
age,  recognised  her ;  and  declared  that  inasmuch  as  Jeroboam  had  provoked 
Jehovah  by  making  for  himself  other  gods  and  molten  images,  his  whole 
family  should  be  exterminated,  and  that  the  sick  child,  who  should  die  as  soon 
as  the  queen  returned  to  the  house,  should  alone  receive  burial.  There  is 
nothing  intrinsically  incredible  in  the  incident  described  ;  but  the  narrative  as 
it  stands  contains  a  phrase  (ver.  9)  inapplicable  to  Jeroboam,  and  the  announce- 
ment of  exile  beyond  the  Euphrates  (ver.  15),  at  a  time  when  Israel  had  not 
yet  come  in  contact  with  the  great  trans  -  Euphratene  power  Assyria,  is 
anachronistic,  whilst  in  the  LXX.  the  story  appears  (as  has  been  seen)  in 
a  different  form  and  connection.  The  statement  that  Jeroboam  worshipped 
other  gods  than  Jehovah  (ver.  9)  is  not  confirmed  by  the  rest  of  the  history 
except  2  Ch.  xi.  15  ;  and  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  name  of  the  son  whom  he 
had  by  the  Egyptian  princess  (according  to  the  LXX. )  contains  the  element 
JAH(A/S/a  =  Abijah). 

RE  HOBO  AM,  who  found  his  kingdom  reduced  to  a  single  tribe, 
seems  to  have  been  quite  a  youth  when  he  came  to  the  throne 
(one  version  of  the  LXX.,  as  already  observed,  giving  his  age  as 
sixteen).  Like  his  northern  rival,  he  early  devoted  much  time 
and  attention  to  the  work  of  defence.     The  support  and  protec- 

^  For  lions  in  Palestine  see  Jitd.  xiv.  5,  i  Sam.  xvii.  34,  2  Sam.  xxiii.  20, 
/  Kg.  XX.  36,  2  Kg.  xvii.  25. 

^  Divine  communications  through  the  medium  of  an  angel  are  a  feature  of 
this  narrative  in  common  with  some  of  the  stories  related  of  Elijah  ;  cf  /  Kg. 
xiii.  18  with  xix.  5,  7,  2  Kg.  L  3,  15.  '  Cf.  /  Sam.  ix.  7,  2  Kg.  viii.  8. 


324  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

tion  so  recently  afforded  to  Jeroboam  by  the  Egyptian  Pharaoh 
indicated  a  direction  from  which  serious  danger  was  to  be  appre- 
hended ;  and  a  large  number  of  cities,  especially  on  the  S.  and 
S.W.  frontiers  of  his  realm,  were  strongly  fortified  (2  Ch.  xi.  5-12). 
The  threatened  storm  soon  broke;  and  in  the  fifth  year  of 
Rehoboam's  reign,  Shishak  (Sheshonk),  with  a  force  (according 
to  the  high  figures  of  2  Ch.  xii.  3)  of  1,200  chariots  and  60,000 
horsemen,  advanced  into  Palestine.  He  fell  upon,  and  harried, 
a  number  of  towns,  the  names  of  which  are  preserved  in  an 
inscription  on  the  temple  of  Amon  at  Kamak.^  Among  these 
were  the  Philistine  city  of  Gaza,  and  the  Judaean  towns  Keilah, 
Socho,  Ezem  (or  Azem),  Arad,  Jehud  (in  Dan,  Josh.  xix.  45), 
Aijalon,  Beth-horon,  Gibeon,  and  Makkedah;  and  the  invader 
even  penetrated  as  far  as  the  capital,  from  which  he  carried  away 
a  vast  quantity  of  treasure  taken  both  from  the  Temple  and  the 
royal  palace  (including  the  golden  shields  which  Solomon  had 
made  for  the  use  of  the  royal  guards,  and  which  Rehoboam  had 
to  replace  by  others  of  inferior  metal).^  But  besides  the  cities 
just  named,  which  were  either  within,  or  on  the  borders  of, 
Judaean  territory,  there  are  comprised  in  the  list  at  Karnak  a 
number  of  others  which  certainly  belonged  to  Israel.  Among 
these  are  Rabbith  and  Hapharaim  in  Issachar  {Josh.  xix.  19,  20), 
Taanach  in  Manasseh  {/ud.  i.  27),  Shunem  in  the  plain  of 
Esdraelon,  and  even  Mahanaim  E.  of  the  Jordan.  The  conclu- 
sion to  be  drawn  from  the  mention  of  these  places  is  uncertain. 
It  may  imply  that  friendly  relations  no  longer  existed  between 
Jeroboam  and  the  Egyptian  king,  and  that  the  country  of  the 
former  no  less  than  Judah  was  the  object  of  thf*'  attack.  But  it 
may  also,  though  perhaps  with  less  probability,  inaicate  that  the 
Egyptian  sovereign  claimed  possession  of  {i.e.  suzerainty  ovei) 
Israel,  and  that  Jeroboam  had  purchased  his  aid  against  Judah 
by  becoming  his  vassal. 

But  whether  Jeroboam  had  been  really  active  in  bringing  about 

^  See  Sayce,  Egypt  of  the  Hebrews,  p.  107,  Driver  in  Authority  and 
Archaology,  p.  87. 

'  According  to  2  Ch.  jdL  5-8  Shemaiah  the  prophet  declared  that  Shishak's 
invasion  was  due  to  the  nation's  abandonment  of  Jehovah,  whereupon  the 
king  and  his  people  humbled  themselves,  and  the  enemy  was  not  suffered  to 
destroy  them  altogether. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  325 

the  invasion  of  Judah  by  Egypt,  or  not,  it  was  impossible  for  the 
Judaean  king  to  refrain  from  making  further  efforts  to  recover  his 
lost  provinces  from  the  usurper.  The  frontier  of  the  two  king- 
doms, which  in  general  lay  between  Bethel  and  Jerusalem,  at  this 
time  ran  along  the  valley  of  Aijalon  and  the  gorge  of  Michmash ; 
and  when  hostilities  were  renewed,  it  was  across  this  border-line 
that  the  fortunes  of  the  war  wavered.  But  of  the  course  of  it  no 
trustworthy  information  is  forthcoming  beyond  the  fact  that  it  was 
prolonged  through  Rehoboam's  lifetime  (z  Kg.  xiv.  30)  and  con- 
tinued into  the  reign  of  his  son  and  grandson.  Almost  as  little 
is  known  of  Rehoboam's  internal  administration  as  of  the  results 
of  his  campaigns.  Like  his  father  he  is  said  to  have  had  a  large 
harem  (comprising  eighteen  wives  and  sixty  concubines)  and  to 
have  been  the  father  of  twenty-eight  sons  and  sixty  daughters. 
During  the  first  three  years  of  his  reign  he  is  described  as  walking 
in  the  way  of  David  and  Solomon  {2  Ch.  xi.  17).  But  subse- 
quently the  religious  corruption  which  had  marked  the  closing 
years  of  Solomon's  life  increased,  and  some  of  the  worst  practices 
of  the  Canaanites  were  introduced  into  the  worship  of  Jehovah 
{i  Kg.  xiv.  24).  In  this  respect  a  mischievous  influence  seems  to 
have  been  exercised  by  his  mother  Naamah  (an  Ammonite 
princess),  and  by  his  favourite  wife  Maacah  {2  Ch.  xiii.  2 
Micaiah)  the  granddaughter  of  Absalom.^ 

An  invasion  of  Israel  by  Rehoboam  with  an  army  amounting  to  the 
enormous  figure  of  180,000  (LXX.  120,000)  men  is  related  to  have  been 
prohibited  by  the  prophet  Shemaiah  in  the  name  of  Jehovah :  and  the  force 
in  consequence  returned  home  (/  Kg.  xii.  21-24,  2  Ch.  xi.  I-4).  The  state- 
ment is  difficult  to  reconcile  with  /  Kg.  xiv.  30. 

Rehoboam  was  succeeded  by  his  son  ABIJAH  or  ABIJAM 
(LXX.  A/3lov\  the  son  of  queen  Maacah.  He  appears  to  have 
resembled  his  father  in  character  and  policy,  but  his  reign  was 
too  brief  for  it  to  leave  much  mark  upon  his  country's  history. 
The  war  with  Israel  was  continued,  and  according  to  the 
Chronicler  (2  Ch.  xiii.  19)  Abijah  captured  Bethel  and  two 
neighbouring  towns,  Jeshanah  and  Ephron.^     But  this  success 

^  According  to  /  Kg.  xv.  2  Maacah  was  the  daughter  of  Abishalom 
(Absalom) ;  but  Absalom  had  only  one  daughter,  Tamar  {2  Sam.  xiv.  27), 
and  in  2  Ch.  xiii.  2  Maacah  (Micaiah)  is  called  the  daughter  of  Uriel. 

'  Identified  by  many  with  the  Ophrah  oi  Josh,  xviii.  23,  /  Sam.  xiii.  17. 


326  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

on  the  part  of  Judah,  from  the  facts  that  no  record  of  it  is 
preserved  in  Kings^  and  that  the  account  of  it  in  Chronicles 
embraces  details  which  do  not  command  confidence,  cannot  be 
considered  as  beyond  question  ;  and  in  any  case  appears  from 
subsequent  events  to  have  been  only  temporary. 

In  2  Ch.  xiii.  Abijah  is  said  to  have  led  an  army  of  400,000  men  against 
Jeroboam,  who  met  him  with  800,000.  Before  the  battle  was  joined,  Abijah 
addressed  the  Israelite  host,  and  after  contrasting  the  worship  of  the  calves 
and  the  maintenance  of  a  non-Levitical  priesthood  in  Israel  with  the  scrupu- 
lous observance  of  the  Mosaic  law  (as  described  in  the  Priestly  code)  which 
is  supposed  to  have  prevailed  in  Judah,  exhorted  the  children  of  Israel  not 
to  fight  against  Jehovah.  Jeroboam,  however,  had  placed  an  ambush  be- 
hind the  Judoeans ;  so  that  the  latter  suddenly  found  themselves  between  two 
foes.  In  their  dismay,  they  called  upon  Jehovah,  and  the  priests  who  ac- 
companied them  with  the  silver  trumpets  of  alarm  {Xu?n.  x.  9)  in  their 
hands,  sounded  with  the  trumpets ;  whereupon  God  smote  Israel  before 
Judah,  and  there  fell  of  the  former  500,000  men,  the  capture  of  Bethel, 
Jeshanah,  and  Ephron  following.  In  the  narrative  not  only  are  the  numbers 
of  the  two  armies  incredibly  large,  but  the  representation  of  the  king  as  a 
faithful  servant  of  Jehovah  is  opposed  to  the  character  given  of  him  in 
I  Kg.  XV.  3  ;  whilst  the  assumption  that  the  distinctive  ordinances  of  the 
Priestly  code  were  at  this  time  in  existence  is  against  the  bulk  of  the  evidence 
bearing  on  the  subject  (see  p.  399).  Even  the  capture  of  the  three  towns 
named  does  not  accord  well  with  the  fortification  of  Ramah  (south  of  Bethel) 
by  Baasha  shortly  afterwards  (/  Kg.  xv.  17). 

Abijah  was  succeeded  by  ASA,  and  Jeroboam,  who  died 
shortly  after  Abijah,  was  succeeded  by  NADAB.  The  reign 
of  Nadab  was  very  short  and  unimportant,  the  only  event  re- 
corded of  it  being  a  war  with  the  Philistines,  whom  the  fratricidal 
conflicts  of  the  Hebrew  peoples  had  encouraged  to  renew  their 
hostilities.  In  the  course  of  this  war  Nadab  besieged  Gibbethon,^ 
on  the  edge  of  the  plain  of  Sharon ;  and  there  met  his  death  by 
the  hands  of  a  conspirator  BAASHA  (or  BAASA)^  a  man  of 
humble  rank  (7  Kg.  xvi.  2)  belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Issachar. 
To  secure  the  throne,  Baasha  murdered  all  the  surviving  members 
of  Jeroboam's  house  ;^  but  in  his  policy  he  did  not  depart  from 
the  principles  which  Jeroboam  observed.  He  seems  to  have 
been  the  first  to  make  Tirzah  (where  Jeroboam  had  built  a 
palace)  into  the  capital  of  the  kingdom.  In  war  he  showed 
himself  a  capable  soldier,  and  prosecuted  with  vigour  the  pro- 
longed struggle  with  the  Southern  Kingdom  when  it  broke  out 
afresh. 

*  A  town  of  Dan,  according  iojosk.  xix.  44, 

•  So  the  best  Heb.  text.        »  Cf.  /  Kg.  xvi.  11,  ^  A^.  x.  il. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  327 

In  consequence  of  Baasha's  walking  in  the  way  of  Jeroboam,  the  prophet 
Jehu,  son  of  Hanani,^  is  represented  (in  i  Kg.  xvi.  1-4)  as  announcing  the 
extermination  of  his  house  in  terms  similar  to  those  put  into  the  mouth 
of  Ahijah  with  respect  to  the  family  of  Jeroboam  himself  (see  i  Kg.  xiv, 
7-II). 

The  throne  of  Judah  was  at  this  time  occupied,  as  has  been 
said,  by  Asa.  Asa's  conceptions  of  religion  were  superior  to 
those  of  his  immediate  predecessors;  and  one  of  his  first  acts 
was  to  check  the  prevalent  corruption  of  worship.  He  en- 
deavoured to  put  an  end  to  the  immorality  which  had  been 
adopted  in  imitation  of  Canaanite  rites,  removed  the  Asherim, 
and  even  degraded  Maacah,  his  father's  mother,  ^  from  her 
position  as  queen-dowager  because  she  had  made  an  idolatrous 
emblem.  But  the  worship  at  the  "  high  places  "  was  not  inter- 
fered with  (z  Kg.  XV.  14)  ;^  and  even  some  of  the  reforms  just 
mentioned  do  not  appear  to  have  been  thoroughly  executed 
(see  I  Kg.  xxii.  46). 

The  religious  reformation  which  Asa  instituted  was,  according  to  2  Ck. 
XV.  I  foil.,  promoted  by  the  prophet  Azariah  the  son  of  Oded  ;  and  was  ex- 
tended by  the  king  to  some  Israelite  cities  which  he  is  represented  as  having 
taken.  The  removal  of  the  various  "abominations"  was  followed  by  a 
festival  held  at  Jerusalem,  at  which  a  covenant  was  made  that  all  should 
seek  Jehovah  on  pain  of  death.  The  spirit  of  the  narrative  is  that  of  a  much 
later  time ;  and  the  assembling  of  the  whole  nation  for  religious  worship  at 
Jerusalem  is  inconsistent  with  the  retention  of  the  "high  places"  (/  Kg. 
XV.   14). 

It  is  probable  that  the  beginning  of  Asa's  reign  was  undis- 
turbed, as  the  Chronicler  represents  it  (2  Ch.  xiv.  i,  6) ;  and 
he  was  thus  enabled  to  devote  attention  to  the  internal  condition 
of  the  kingdom.  But  his  tranquillity  was  eventually  broken  by 
war.  If  the  Chronicler  may  be  trusted,  an  invader  styled 
"Zerah  the  Ethiopian,"  who  is  identified  by  some  with  the 
Egyptian  king  Osorkon  II.,  following  in  the  steps  of  Shishak, 
made  an  inroad  into  Judah.  He  was  met  by  Asa  at  Mareshah, 
in  the  Shephelah,  and  defeated;  and  Asa,  following  up  his  victory, 
smote  a  number  of  cities  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Gerar,  and 
returned  home  laden  with  spoil.     But  this  attack  from  the  S.W. 

*  See  2  Ch.  xvi.  7. 

2  Maacah,  in  /  Kg.  xv.  10,  is  described  as  the  mother  of  Asa,  but  obviously 
the  princess  intended  was  his  grandmother. 

'  The  Chronicler  states  the  opposite  in  2  Ch,  xiv.  3,  5,  contradicting  him- 
self in  XV.  17. 


328  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

gave  Baasha  in  the  N.  an  opportunity  of  which  he  was  not  slow 

to  take  advantage.     He  assumed  the  offensive,  and  fortified  the 

town  of  Ramah,  south  of  the  pass  of  Michmash,  and  only  five 

miles  from  Jerusalem,  as  a  menace  to  the  enemy's  capital.     So 

formidable  a  foe  did  he  prove  to  the  Southern  Kingdom  that  Asa 

felt  constrained  to  invoke  the  aid  of  the  Syrians  of  Damascus. 

Damascus,  ever  since  the  days  of  Rezon,^  had  naturally  been 

drawn  towards  the  enemies  of  Solomon  and  his  dynasty;  and 

at  the  present  time  the  Syrians  were  in  alliance  with  Baasha. 

But  Asa,   by  the  sacrifice  of  considerable  treasure,  derived  in 

part  from  what  was  still  left  in  the  Temple,  induced  Benhadad, 

the  Syrian  king,  to  break  his  league  with  Israel  and  contract  one 

with    Judah    {i  Kg.   xv.    19,    marg.).     The    Syrians    probably 

required  little  inducement,  for  the  exclusive  command  of  the 

roads  leading  through  Israel  to  the  coast  must  always  have  been 

an  object  of  desire  to  them.     Accordingly  they  attacked  and 

captured,  en  the  one  hand,  Ijon  and  Dan  which  obstructed  their 

approach  to  Tyre,  and  on  the  other  hand,  Abel-beth-Maacah 

(in  2  Ch.  xvi.  4  Abelmaim)  and  the  district  around  Chinnereth, 

through  which  passed  the  road  to  the  maritime  plain  and  the 

south.     This   diversion    relieved    Judah,   and    enabled   Asa   to 

dismantle   Ramah;    and   with   the  materials   thus  obtained  he 

in  his  turn  fortified  Geba  and  Mizpah.     But  the  appeal  to  Syria 

did  not  pass  without  censure,  and  according  to  2  Ch.  xvi.  7-10 

the  prophet  Hanani  rebuked  the   king   for  relying  upon  such 

foreign  aid  instead  of  upon  Jehovah.  2    Asa  is  said  to  have  put 

his  rebuker  in  prison,  and  at  the  same  time  to  have  been  guilty 

of  some  other  acts  of  oppression.     His  reign  was  a  long  one, 

and  before  the  close  of  it,  he  suffered  much  from  disease  in  his 

feet. 

The  account  of  Zerah's  invasion  only  occurs  in  Chrcniichs  {2  Ch.  xiv.). 
Many  of  the  details  in  it  are  incredible  (for  instance,  Asa  has  an  army  of 
580,000,  whilst  the  invaders  number  no  less  than  1,000,000,  with  300 
chariots),  but  there  seems  to  be  nothing  inconsistent  with  historic  proba- 
bility in  the  fact  of  an  attack  from  the  quarter  of  Eg)pt,  and  Osorkon  II.,  of 

^  The  Hezian,  who  in  i  Kg.  xv.  18  is  represented  as  the  grandfather  of 
Benhadad,  is  probably  identical  with  the  Rezon  of  xi.  23  (see  p.  296).  Damascus 
by  this  time  had  probably  absorbed  many  of  the  S>Tian  states  which  had  been 
conquered  by  David,  such  as  Zobah,  Maacah,  and  Geshur. 

'  Cf.  the  attitude  of  Isaiah  towards  an  alliance  with  Assyria  {Is.  vii. ). 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  329 

the  22nd  dynasty  is  said  to  have  claimed  the  submission  of  the  peoples  of 
Palestine.  But  if  Zerah  is  really  Osorkon  II.,  the  description  of  him  as 
an  Ethiopian  (Heb.  a  Cushite)  appears  to  be  a  mistake.  *  Some,  on  the 
strength  of  the  combination  of  Cushites  with  Arabians  in  2  Ch,  xxi.  i6, 
have  supposed  that  Zerah  belonged  to  an  Arabian  tribe. 

Baasha  was  succeeded  on  the  throne  of  Israel  by  his  son 
ELAH^  who  seems  to  have  possessed  nothing  of  his  father's 
warlike  qualities.  Of  his  reign  little  is  related  except  the  con- 
tinuation, or  perhaps  the  renewal,  of  the  siege  of  the  Philistine 
town  of  Gibbethon.  The  army  before  the  place  was  commanded 
by  OMRI ;  and  whilst  he  was  there,  the  news  was  brought  to 
him  that  Elah  had  been  murdered  by  ZIMRI^  the  captain  of 
half  his  chariot  force,  in  the  course  of  a  drunken  carousal  in  his 
capital  Tirzah.  Omri  was  at  once  made  king  by  the  soldiery 
gathered  before  Gibbethon;  and  he  thereupon  marched  to 
Tirzah,  where  he  besieged  Zimri.  The  latter,  who  had  followed 
up  the  assassination  of  Elah  by  the  destruction  of  all  his 
kindred,  as  soon  as  he  saw  the  city  taken  by  the  besiegers,  set 
fire  to  the  palace,  whither  he  had  retired,  and  perished  in  the 
flames.  Omri,  however,  did  not  succeed  to  the  throne  without  a 
further  struggle,  for  a  large  section  of  the  nation  supported  the 
claims  of  TIBNI  the  son  of  Ginath  (LXX.  Gonath).  If  the 
chronology  given  in  i  Kg.  xvi.  15  is  to  be  reconciled  with  that 
of  ver.  23,  the  contest  between  them  lasted  some  four  years,  and 
ended  with  the  overthrow  of  Tibni,  with  whom  his  brother 
Joram  (according  to  the  LXX.)  likewise  perished.  Omri,  when 
once  in  secure  possession  of  the  crown,  proved  an  able  and 
successful  monarch.  Dissatisfied  with  the  position  of  the  capital 
Tirzah  (his  own  capture  of  which  showed  it  to  be  not  very 
defensible),  he  built  on  the  hill  of  Shomron,  purchased  from  a 
certain  Shemer,  a  city  which  he  called  by  the  same  name, 
Shomron  or  Samaria,  and  transferred  to  it  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment. The  situation  was  well  chosen,  for  the  new  capital  stood 
on  a  height  in  the  midst  of  a  fertile  valley  (cf.  Is.  xxviii.  i),  and 
the  long  sieges  it  sustained  witness  to  its  natural  strength.  Omri 
next  reasserted  Israelite  authority  over  the  Moabites^  (who  after 
having  been  subdued  by  David,  had  seemingly  attempted  to 
throw  off  the  yoke  of  his  successors) ;  and  imposed  upon  them 

^  See  Sayce,  H,  C.  M.,  p.  363.         *  See  the  Moabite  Stone,  App.  B. 


330  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

a  heavy  tribute,  which  in  the  time  of  his  son  amounted  (if  the 
figures  are  correct)  to  200,000  head  of  sheep  (2  Kg.  iii.  4). 
In  regard  to  Syria,  he  was  not  so  fortunate,  as  he  had  to  make  a 
surrender  of  some  territory  (presumably  on  the  E.  of  Jordan), 
and  to  set  apart  "  streets  "  or  quarters  in  his  new  city  of  Samaria 
for  the  use  of  Syrian  traders  and  settlers  (7  Kg.  xx.  34).  ^  He 
contracted  a  marriage  alliance  with  the  Phoenicians  by  uniting  his 
son  Ahab  to  the  Phoenician  princess  Jezebel,  daughter  of  Ethbaal 
king  of  Zidon  and  Tyre  (Jos.  Ant.  viii.  13,  i).  Ethbaal,  or 
Ithbaal  (EWdt/SaXos  or  'I66/3aXos),  was  originally  priest  of 
Ashtoreth,  who  had  obtained  the  throne  by  murdering  the 
reigning  monarch  Pheles  (Jos.  c.  Ap.  i.  §  18);  and  the  con- 
nection formed  by  Omri  with  his  house,  though  it  doubtless 
had  political  advantages  by  uniting  the  two  nations  for  purposes 
of  common  defence  against  Syria  or  the  Assyrians,  and  by 
furthering  their  trading  interests,  inevitably  had  a  bad  effect 
upon  the  religion  of  Israel,  by  leading  to  the  introduction  and 
encouragement  of  the  worship  of  the  Zidonian  Baal.  But  apart 
from  this,  Omri  appears  to  have  promoted  the  prosperity  of  his 
country,  and  of  the  firm  hold  which  he  secured  upon  his 
people's  respect  some  slight  indication  is  afforded  by  the  fact 
that  his  dynasty  was  less  short-lived  than  any  of  those  that  had 
preceded  it.  It  was  during  the  reign  of  Omri  that  Israel  first 
became  familiar  to  the  Assyrians,  for  in  their  inscriptions  of  this 
age  the  land  of  Israel  is  regularly  termed  "the  land  of  Omri."^ 
This  people,  after  extending  their  power  in  the  direction  of 
Mesopotamia  and  Armenia,  had,  about  iioo  B.C.,  under  Tiglath 
Pileser  L,  reached  N.  Phoenicia  and  the  Mediterranean  Sea.  In 
the  time  of  David  and  Solomon  (about  1000  B.C.)  their  power 
had  declined;  but  it  rose  again  under  Asshur-nasir-pal  III. 
(884-860),  who  advanced  to  Lebanon  and  threatened  Tyre  and 
the  other  Phoenician  cities.  It  was  probably  this  menacing 
advance  on  the  part  of  Assyria  that  drew  Omri  and  Ethbaal 
together,  and  led  (as  has  been  related)  to  the  cementing  of  an 
alliance  by  the  marriage  of  Ahab  and  Jezebel. 

Asa  of  Judah  and  Omri  of  Israel  died  within  a  year  or  two 

^  Different  trades  seem  to  have  had  their  own  "streets";  seejer.  xxxvii.  21. 
'  Schrader,  Cuneiform  Inscriptions ^  i.  179,  180  (ed.  Whitehouse). 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  331 

of  each  other,  and  were  succeeded  respectively  by  their  sons 
JEHOSHAPHAT  and  AHAB,  Jehoshaphat,  in  the  internal 
conduct  of  his  kingdom,  continued  the  early  policy  of  his  father. 
He  carried  on  the  religious  reforms  which  the  latter  had  initiated; 
and  put  an  end  to  what  still  remained  of  the  immoral  practices 
that  defiled  religious  worship,  though  the  abolition  of  the  "  high 
places,"  the  chief  seats  of  such  practices,  was  not  yet  contem- 
plated (i  Kg.  xxii.  46,  43).^  By  the  Chronicler  {2  Ch.  xvii.)  he 
is  represented  as  ensuring  security  and  justice  at  home,  and 
enforcing  respect  among  the  PhiHstines  and  Arabians  abroad; 
but  though  the  facts  in  general  may  be  as  stated,  the  particulars 
furnished  are  not  such  as  to  command  implicit  confidence.  It 
is  clear,  however,  that  on  his  southern  frontier  he  tightened  his 
hold  upon  Edom,  which  was  ruled  by  a  deputy  or  nominee  of 
the  Judsean  king :  whilst  on  the  north  the  protracted  war  with 
Israel  was  brought  to  a  close  (i  Kg.  xxii.  44).  The  conditions 
upon  which  peace  was  made  are  not  known ;  but  the  subsequent 
relations  of  the  two  peoples  seem  to  imply  some  degree  of  subor- 
dination on  the  part  of  Judah.^  The  peace  was  ratified  by  the 
marriage  of  Jehoshaphat's  son  to  the  daughter  of  Ahab  {2  Kg. 
viii.  18). 

The  measures  of  defence  ascribed  to  Jehoshaphat  in  2  Ch.  xvii.  include  the 
placing  of  garrisons  not  only  in  the  cities  of  Judah  but  also  in  the  cities  of 
Israel  taken  by  his  father  (cf.  xv.  8) ;  whilst  his  army  is  estimated  at  the 
enormous  total  of  i,i6o,0(X),  in  addition  to  the  garrisons  of  the  fortresses. 
The  fact  that  in  the  subsequent  history  Jehoshaphat  uses  to  the  king  of  Israel 
language  suggestive  of  vassalage  (/  Kg.  xxii.  4,  2  Kg.  iii.  7,  cf.  i  Kg.  xx.  3-4) 
negatives  the  belief  that  he  possessed  such  resources  as  described.  The 
measures  he  is  said  to  have  adopted  for  the  improvement  of  his  people  com- 
prised (i)  a  mission  of  princes,  Levites,  and  priests,  to  teach  a  knowledge  of 
•'the  book  of  the  law  of  Jehovah";  and  (2)  the  establishment  of  local 
courts  of  justice  in  every  city,  with  a  court  of  appeal  at  Jerusalem,  the  latter 
consisting  of  Levites,  priests,  and  heads  of  houses,  and  sitting  in  two  divisions, 
under  Amariah  the  chief  priest  and  Zebadiah  the  ruler  of  the  house  of  Judah, 
to  hear  ecclesiastical  and  civil  causes  respectively  {2  Ch.  xvii.  7-9,  xix.  4-1 1). 
The  distinction  drawn  here  between  Levites  and  Priests  belongs  to  a  later 
period  than  this ;  and  the  judicial  arrangements  seem  to  reproduce  the  legisla- 
tion of  Deut.  xvii.  8-1 1. 

The  control  which  Jehoshaphat  secured  over  Edom  (as  attested  by  i  Kg. 
xxii.  47-48)  was  perhaps  the  result  of  some  signal  disaster  sustained  by  the 
Edomites,  of  which  a  highly -coloured  and  idealised  account  is  given  in 
a  Ch.  xx.   1-30.     There  it  is  related  that  a  combined  force  of  Moabites, 

*  Contrast  2  Ch.  xvii.  6,  which  is  contradicted  in  xx.  33. 

*  See  further,  p.  335. 


332  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Ammonites,  and  Edomites,^  made  a  circuit  of  the  southern  extremity  of  the 
Dead  Sea,  and  following  its  western  marge  as  far  as  Engedi,  advanced  into 
Judah  across  the  wilderness  of  Tekoa.  Jehoshaphat,  in  spite  of  the  1, 160,000 
men  with  which  he  is  credited  in  2  Ch.  xvii.,  was  so  alarmed  that  he  pro- 
claimed a  general  fast,  and  offered  in  the  Temple  a  solemn  prayer  for  protec- 
tion. Upon  this  Jahaziel,  a  Levite,  encouraged  him  to  expect  the  Divine 
intervention ;  and  the  next  morning  the  army  advanced  towards  the  enemy, 
headed  by  a  body  of  minstrels.  As  these  sang  to  Jehovah,  He  caused  a 
quarrel  to  arise  among  the  confederates,  and  they  destroyed  one  another,  so 
that  when  the  Judaean  army  came  upon  them,  they  found  them  all  dead. 
After  spending  three  days  in  gathering  the  spoil  they  assembled  to  bless 
Jehovah  in  the  valley  of  Beracah*  (whence  its  name,  "blessing"),  and  then 
returned  with  joy  to  Jerusalem. 

Of  the  reign  of  AHAB,  Omri's  son  and  successor  on  the 
throne  of  Israel,  more  information  has  been  preserved  than  is  the 
case  with  many.  It  was  rendered  memorable  by  two  protracted 
conflicts.  The  first  was  the  war  with  Syria,  which  occupied,  with 
intervals  of  tranquiUity,  a  large  part  of  it,  and  was  characterised 
by  remarkable  fluctuations  of  fortune.  The  other  was  a  struggle 
between  the  national  religion  of  Jehovah  and  the  religion  of  the 
Zidonian  Baal  introduced  by  queen  Jezebel.  Ahab,  like  Solomon, 
permitted  to  his  wife  the  practice  of  her  native  worship;  and 
erected  in  honour  of  Baal  an  Asherah  and  a  pillar  (i  Kg.  xvi.  32, 
xxi.  26,  2  Kg.  iii.  2).  The  importation  into  Israel  of  the  rites 
of  the  deity  of  a  powerful  state  like  Zidon  was  a  much  more 
serious  danger  to  the  purity  of  Jehovah's  worship  than  any  that 
could  arise  from  the  imitation  of  the  customs  observed  by  the 
survivors  of  the  Canaanites  within  Israel's  own  borders;  and  it 
accordingly  provoked  more  vehement  antagonism  to  the  throne 
from  the  prophets  of  Jehovah  than  had  been  manifested  during 
the  lifetime  of  any  previous  king.  Among  the  minor  incidents 
of  the  reign  which  may  be  mentioned  here  is  the  fortification 
of  the  town  of  Jericho  (which  must  have  been  rebuilt  as  early 
as  David's  time,  2  Sam.  x.  5)  by  a  certain  Hiel  of  Bethel,  in  the 
loss  of  whose  children  during  the  progress  of  the  work  the  curse 
long  ago  imprecated  by  Joshua  on  anyone  who  should  restore 
it  {Josh.  vi.  26)  was  thought  to  have  had  its  fulfilment. 

The  immediate  cause  of  the  Syrian  war  is  unknown;  but  it 
may  be  conjectured  that  Ahab  made  an  attempt  to  throw  off  the 

1  See  2  Ch.  xx.  10. 

'  The  valley  of  Jehoshaphat  xn.  Joel  iii.  2,  12  is  supposed  by  some  to  be  an 
allusion  to  this. 


ISRAEL   AND   JUDAH  333 

Syrian  yoke  which  had  been  imposed  upon  his  father  Omri.  His 
early  operations  must  have  been  unfortunate,  for  Benhadad  II. 
(called  Hadadezer  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions),  son  of  the  Ben- 
hadad who  had  exchanged  the  alliance  with  Baasha  for  one  with 
Asa  (i  Kg.  XV.  18),  invaded  the  territory  of  Ahab  with  a  large 
force,  including  thirty-two  subject  kings.  Samaria  was  invested ; 
and  the  Israelite  sovereign  was  prepared  to  acquiesce  once  more 
in  a  condition  of  vassalage  (i  Kg.  xx.  3-4) ;  but  the  final  terms 
imposed  (the  surrender  of  the  city  to  indiscriminate  plunder) ^ 
were  too  humiliating  to  be  accepted;  and  with  the  support  of 
his  people,  Ahab  determined  to  defy  the  invader  (xx.  6-9). 
He  was  further  encouraged  by  a  prophet  who,  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah,  foretold  his  success.  The  promised  deliverance  was 
brought  about  by  a  sally  made  from  the  city  by  a  band  of  232 
youths,  attached  to  the  persons  of  the  provincial  governors, 
whose  adventurous  surprise  of  Benhadad,  when  the  latter  was 
carousing  with  his  vassals,  was  followed  up  by  the  attack  of 
Ahab  and  his  army  (numbering  7,000  men).  The  Syrian  king 
effected  his  escape ;  but  a  great  slaughter  was  inflicted  upon  his 
troops.  The  war,  however,  was  renewed  the  next  year.  An 
equally  large  force  was  collected  by  the  Syrians,  in  which  the 
thirty-two  vassal  kings,  who  were  perhaps  held  responsible  for 
the  previous  disaster,  had  to  resign  their  commands  to  other 
officers.  The  preceding  defeat  having  taken  place  on  the  high 
ground  upon  which  Samaria  was  situated,  the  Syrians  concluded 
that  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Israel,  was  a  god  of  the  hills ;  and  they 
therefore  chose,  as  the  scene  of  the  next  battle,  the  more  level 
country  near  Aphek,  a  town  E.  of  the  Lake  of  Chinnereth,  of  which 
they  held  possession.  After  facing  each  other  for  seven  days,  the 
two  armies  engaged,  the  Syrians  being  again  defeated  with  great 
slaughter.^  Many  of  the  survivors  took  refuge  in  Aphek,  but 
lost  their  lives  when  the  walls  were  breached  and  the  city 
stormed.  Benhadad  was  now  compelled  to  sue  for  his  Hfe, 
which  Ahab  granted,  but  imposed  on  him  as  the  price  of  peace 
the  same  terms  as  those  exacted  from  his  own  father  previously, 
the  Syrians  agreeing  to  restore  the  cities  taken  from  Omri,  and 

*  In  7  Kg.  XX.  6  for  in  thine  eyes  the  LXX.  (xxi.  6)  has  in  their  eyes. 
^  The  number  of  the  slain  (100,000  foot)  is  doubtless  much  exaggerated. 


334  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  allow  Israel  to  enjoy  in  Damascus  similar  rights  to  those 
which  had  been  conceded  to  themselves  in  Samaria.  The  mercy 
shown  to  so  dangerous  a  foe  was  regarded  with  disfavour  by 
some  in  Israel,  and  a  prophet  condemned  the  king's  conduct  in 
the  name  of  Jehovah.  The  prophet  is  said  to  have  directed 
a  companion  to  smite  and  wound  him,  and  on  his  refusing, 
declared  that  for  his  disobedience  a  lion  should  slay  him,  a  pre- 
diction which  was  shortly  accomplished.  Inducing  another  to 
carry  out  his  wishes,  he  next  disguised  himself,  and  in  this  con- 
dition appeared  before  Ahab.  Then  professing  to  have  been 
entrusted  in  the  recent  battle  with  a  prisoner  whom  he  was 
bidden  to  keep  on  peril  of  his  life  or  the  payment  of  a  fine,  but 
whom  he  had  suffered  to  escape,  he  appealed  to  the  king  for 
redress  against  the  man  whom  he  alleged  to  have  treated  him 
with  violence  on  account  of  his  negligence.  The  king,  however, 
declared  that  he  was  self-condemned;  whereupon  the  prophet, 
stripping  off  his  disguise,  announced  to  Ahab  that  the  divinely- 
appointed  destruction  from  which  he  had  preserved  Benhadad 
would  in  consequence  overtake  himself  (see  i  Kg.  xx.). 

The  narrative  relating  the  nameless^  prophet's  denunciation  of  Ahab's 
clemency  to  Benhadad  has  certain  features  in  common  with  the  story  in  J  Kg. 
xiii.  (see  p.  223),  e.g.  the  punishment  of  disobedience  through  the  agency  of  a 
lion,  and  the  use  of  the  phrase  said  {cried)  by  the  word  ^Jehovah  (xx.  35, 
xiii.  2,  5,  17,  18) ;  and  its  historical  value  has,  in  consequence,  been  suspected 
by  some  scholars. 

The  real  reason  for  Ahab's  forbearance  towards  Benhadad  was 
doubtless  the  danger  that  now  began  to  threaten  from  the 
Assyrians.  These,  under  Shalmaneser  II.  (the  son  and  successor 
of  Asshur-nasir-pal  III.),  who  reigned  from  860  to  825,  again 
entered  upon  that  advance  towards  the  West  which  ultimately 
proved  so  disastrous  to  the  smaller  monarchies  of  the  Palestinian 
coastland;  and  Syria  and  Israel  for  a  time  were  united  in  the 
face  of  the  common  foe.  The  peril  that  menaced  them  became 
acute  when  Shalmaneser  in  his  westward  progress,  after  receiving 
the  submission  of  the  Hittites  of  Carchemish,  attacked  the  king- 
dom of  Hamath ;  and  both  Ahab  and  Benhadad  (Hadadezer) 
combined  for  its  defence.     A  large  force,  consisting  of  10,000 

^  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  14,  5)  identifies  the  prophet  with  Micaiah ;  cf.  /  -A^. 
xxii.  8. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  335 

Hamathites  (with  700  chariots  and  700  horsemen),  20,000 
Syrians  (with  1,200  chariots  and  1,210  horsemen),  and  10,000 
Israelites  (with  2,000  chariots),  together  with  contingents  from 
Arvad,  Ammon,  Musre,^  and  other  smaller  states,  encountered 
the  Assyrians  at  Karkar,  a  city  lying  to  the  north  of  Hamath 
near  the  Orontes  (b.c.  854) ;  and  these  were  defeated  with  heavy 
loss  (if  the  Assyrian  account  may  be  trusted),  14,000  men  being 
slain.  This  broke  up  the  confederacy,  and  Hamath  was  left  to 
its  fate.  A  further  consequence  was  the  crippling  of  Damascus, 
which  was  more  exposed  to  Assyrian  vengeance  than  some  of  its 
neighbours ;  and  this  in  turn  affected  the  relations  of  Israel  and 
Judah.  The  latter  no  longer  had  an  ally  to  counterbalance  the 
preponderating  strength  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  ;  and  in  conse- 
quence had  to  make  terms  with  its  adversary,  and  accept  the 
position  (which  seems  to  be  indicated  in  i  Kg.  xxii.  4,  2  Kg. 
iii.  7)  of  a  dependent  state.  As  already  mentioned,  the  peace 
was  cemented  by  the  marriage  of  Jehoshaphat's  son  Jehoram 
to  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab. 

The  union  between  Ahab  and  the  Zidonian  princess  Jezebel 
gave,  as  has  been  previously  implied,  a  strong  impulse  to  the  cult 
of  the  Zidonian  Baal.  Baal  did  not,  indeed,  take  the  place  of 
Jehovah  as  the  national  god,  or  even  attract  to  himself  the  entire 
worship  of  the  court,  as  appears  from  (a)  the  names  (compounded 
with  JAH  or  JO)  which  were  borne  by  some  of  Ahab's  children 
(Ahaziah,  Jehoram,  Joash,  Athaliah),  {b)  the  attendance  upon 
Ahab  of  Obadiah  (who  both  by  his  name  and  by  his  own  con- 
fession {i  Kg.  xviii.  12)  was  a  servant  of  Jehovah),  and  {c)  the 
assembling  in  his  presence,  even  at  the  close  of  his  reign,  of 
prophets  who  professed  to  speak  in  Jehovah's  name  (i  Kg. 
xxii.  12).  But  the  influence  of  Jezebel  not  only  led  to  the 
protection  2  and  toleration  of  Baal  worship,  but  to  its  active 
dissemination,  and  to  the  persecution  of  those  prophets  of 
Jehovah  who  opposed  her  religious  zeal.  The  chief  of  these  was 
Elijah,  a  native  of  Tishbeh  in  Gilead,^  a  man  of  passionate 
temperament  and  dauntless  spirit,  who,  reared  in  the  freedom 

*  See  below,  p.  343.  2  q^  j  jcg^  xviii.  19  (end). 

*  In  7  Ki^.  xvii.  i  for  of  tht  sojourners  (of  Gilead)  the  LXX.  has  U  Qeapuv, 
Josephus  {Ani.  viii.  13,  2)  ix  t6\€w$  Qea^uvrji. 


336  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

which  prevailed  in  the  uncultivated  districts  E.  of  the  Jordan, 
and  accustomed  to  a  rough  garb  and  hard  fare,  was  equally  proof 
against  favour  and  fear.  Many  stories  in  which  he  is  the  central 
figure,  testify  to  the  impression  he  made  upon  the  nation  at  large, 
and  depict,  more  or  less  faithfully,  leading  incidents  in  the  con- 
test he  maintained  against  an  alien  religion. 

According  to  the  narrative  contained  in  /  Kg.  xvii,-xix.,  Elijah  predicted, 
as  a  penalty  for  the  nation's  disloyalty  to  Jehovah,  a  three  years'  drought ;  * 
and  thereupon  was  directed  to  hide  himself  by  the  brook  Cherith  E.  of 
Jordan  (which  was  seemingly  not  yet  dried  up)  where  he  found  water,  and 
was  fed  for  a  time  by  ravens.  On  the  brook  becoming  dry,  he  went  to  the 
city  of  Zarephath  (lying  between  Tyre  and  Zidon)  where  he  was  received 
by  a  poor  widow,  whose  scanty  store  of  meal  and  oil  he  declared  should  not 
fail  until  rain  came.  During  his  sojourn  with  her,  the  widow's  only  son  died, 
but  was  restored  to  life  by  the  prophet.  In  the  third  year,  Elijah,  whom 
Ahab  had  sought  for  everywhere,  suddenly  presented  himself  before  the  king, 
and  challenged  him  to  summon  the  prophets  of  Baal '  to  mount  Carmel,  and 
there  let  a  solemn  decision  be  made  between  their  god  and  Jehovah.  Ahab 
consenting,  the  prophets  assembled  and  sacrifices  were  prepared,  and  in  the 
presence  of  the  people  appeal  was  made  to  Baal  by  his  votaries  and  to 
Jehovah  by  Elijah  to  demonstrate  their  power  by  consuming  the  offerings 
by  fire.  Elijah's  confidence  was  signally  justified ;  and  he  thereupon 
bade  the  people  put  the  idolatrous  prophets  to  death.  The  victory  thus 
gained  for  the  national  faith  was  further  confirmed  by  an  immediate  fall 
of  abundant  rain  upon  the  thirsty  land.  But  when  Jezebel  heard  of  the 
slaughter  of  Baal's  prophets,  Elijah  once  more  had  to  flee  for  his  life,  and 
withdrew  in  dejection  to  the  wilderness  of  Beersheba  (in  Judah).  Thence  he 
was  bidden  by  an  angel  to  proceed  to  mount  Horeb,  where,  after  wind  and 
earthquake  and  fire  had  passed  and  failed  to  convey  to  him  a  sense  of  the 
Divine  presence,  a  sound  of  gentle  stillness^  revealed  Jehovah.  By  Him  he 
was  told  that  his  despair  for  the  cause  of  Jehovah  in  Israel  was  baseless  ;  and 
was  bidden  to  return  and  anoint  Hazael  to  be  king  over  Syria,  Jehu  to  be 
king  over  Israel,  and  Elisha  of  Abel-meholah  ■*  to  succeed  himself  in  his 
prophetic  office.  The  last-mentioned  he  found  following  the  plough,  and  cast 
his  mantle  upon  him,  which  Elisha  took  as  a  sign  to  leave  his  home  and 
become  Elijah's  minister. 

These  chapters  form  part  of  a  series  of  narratives  concerning  Elijah,  which, 

^  Josephus  {Ant.  viii.  13,  2)  quotes  Menander  as  recording  the  occurrence 
ot  a  drought  in  the  reign  of  the  Tyrian  king  Ithobalus  (Ethbaal),  lasting 
a  year. 

'  The  prophets  of  the  Asherah  named  in  xviii.  19  are  not  mentioned  sub- 
sequently in  ver.  22,  25,  and  40;  and  the  clause  has  been  suspected  to  be 
interpolated. 

'  In  c.  xix.  the  passage  gb-iia  substantially  anticipates  13b- 14,  and  the 
address  of  Jehovah  to  the  prophet  seems  out  of  place  before  the  theophany 
described  in  ver.  lib.  Wind,  earthquake,  and  fire  are  elsewhere  often  the 
accompaniments  of  God's  presence  {Ex.  xix.  18,  Fs.  xviii.  8-10,  Ezek.  i.  4, 
Job  xxxviii.  i),  but  here  a  more  refined  representation  is  substituted,  though 
the  conception  is  still  physical,  not  purely  ethical  (LXX.  <l)uvrj  aHpai  Xctt^s)* 

*  In  the  neighbourhood  of  Bethshan  (/  Kg.  iv.  12). 


ISRAEL  AND   JUDAH  337 

as  incorporated  by  the  historian  of  Kings^  are  not  quite  complete.  Thus  the 
reason  for  the  drought  is  left  to  be  inferred,  no  account  is  given  of  the  persecu- 
tion of  Jehovah's  prophets  by  Jezebel  (alluded  to  in  xviii.  3),  and  the  execution  of 
the  command  to  anoint  Hazael  and  Jehu  is  not  related  (for  the  anointing  of 
Jehu  by  the  direction  of  Elisha  in  2  Kg,  ix.  is  manifestly  a  different  re- 
presentation). 

But  Ahab  not  only  tolerated  (if  he  did  not  favour)  the  worship 
of  Baal;  he  became  guilty  of  an  act  of  high-handed  tyranny. 
Desiring  to  possess  a  vineyard  belonging  to  a  man  named  Naboth, 
at,  or  near,  Jezreel  (where  Ahab  had  a  palace),  he  endeavoured  to 
obtain  it  by  purchase  or  exchange.  The  owner,  however,  refused 
to  part  with  his  patrimony  -}  and  Ahab  did  not  conceal  his  dis- 
appointment. Jezebel,  on  learning  the  facts,  at  once  promised  to 
procure  what  he  wanted ;  and  accordingly  wrote  to  the  elders  of 
Jezreel,  and  bade  them  suborn  witnesses  who  should  charge 
Naboth  with  blasphemy  and  treason.^  On  their  testimony  the 
man  was  put  to  death,  together  with  his  sons,  and  all  his  property 
was  confiscated  to  the  king's  use.  This  judicial  murder  called 
forth  from  Elijah,  who  met  Ahab,  attended  by  his  officers  Jehu 
and  Bidkar,  on  his  way  to  take  possession  of  the  estate,  a  de- 
nunciation of  doom  against  the  king,  the  queen,  and  the  whole 
royal  house.  The  words  of  the  prophet  were  not  lost  upon  Jehu, 
who  (it  may  be  conjectured)  was  first  prompted  to  the  course  he 
afterwards  followed  by  hearing  the  prophet's  sentence  of  judg- 
ment. But  as  Ahab  humbled  himself  before  Jehovah,  and 
exhibited  sorrow  for  his  sin,  the  evil  to  come  (it  is  related) 
was  declared  to  be  postponed  until  the  reign  of  his  son. 

The  account  given  in  i  Kg.  xxi.  of  the  incident  of  Naboth's  vineyard 
departs  slightly  from  that  which  is  implied  in  the  narrative  of  the  sequel 
in  2  Kg.  ix.  According  to  the  former  Ahab  coveted  Naboth's  vineyard 
in  Jezreel,  where  after  the  owner's  execution  he  was  found  by  Elijah  ;  but 
according  to  the  latter  the  king  desired  Ihe  portion  of  Naboth's  Jie id  near 
Jezreel,  and  to  it  he  was  going  down  in  his  chariot  accompanied  by  Jehu  and 
Bidkar,  when  encountered  by  the  prophet :  and  the  two  passages  relate 
Elijah's  sentence  of  judgment  in  different  terms. 

It  is  now  necessary  to  revert  to  Israel's  foreign  relations.  Moab, 
which  had  received  severe  treatment  from  Omri,  renewed  hostili- 

^  Cf.  Ntim.  xxxvi.  7. 

*  The  direction  that  Naboth,  on  the  occasion  of  the  public  fast  that  was 
proclaimed,  should  be  set  on  high  among  the  people  (/  Kg.  xxi.  9)  was 
probably  intended  to  disarm  suspicion. 

Z 


338  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

ties  in  the  reign  of  his  son,  and  Mesha  the  Moabite  king  captured 
numerous  cities  in  the  territories  of  Reuben  and  Gad,  amongst 
them  being  Medeba,  Ataroth,  Nebo,  Jahaz,  and  Horonaim.^ 
This  revolt,  according  to  2  Kg.  i.  i,  did  not  take  place  until  after 
the  close  of  Ahab's  reign ;  but  the  inscription  of  Mesha  implies 
that  it  was  begun  in  Ahab's  lifetime.  In  regard  to  Syria,  though 
the  purpose  of  the  alliance  between  it  and  Israel  was  frustrated 
by  the  defeat  at  Karkar,^  peace  between  the  two  countries  was 
maintained  for  nearly  three  years.  Then  Syria's  failure  to  restore 
Ramoth  Gilead,  which  Israel  claimed,  and  which  was  probably 
one  of  the  cities  which  Benhadad  had  engaged  to  surrender  after 
the  disaster  at  Aphek,  led  to  war.  The  place  was  valuable  from 
its  nearness  to  the  trade  route  which  ran  from  Damascus  to  the 
Red  Sea  and  Arabia ;  and  Ahab  called  upon  Jehoshaphat  of  Judah, 
who  was  presumably  bound  to  supply  him  with  auxiliaries  in  his 
wars,  to  aid  him  to  recover  it.  Jehoshaphat  acceded  ;^  and  Ahab 
was  encouraged  by  a  number  of  prophets,  who  professed  to  speak 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  to  anticipate  success.  Only  a  single 
prophet  was  found  to  predict  a  disastrous  issue  to  the  expedition, 
Micaiah  the  son  of  Imlah ;  but  his  presage  was  fulfilled  by  the 
event.  Ahab,  to  avoid  the  death  which  Micaiah  declared  he 
would  meet  with,  entered  the  battle  in  disguise;  but  though  he 
thus  escaped  being  marked  for  attack  by  the  Syrians  (who  mistook 
Jehoshaphat  for  the  king  of  Israel,  until  something  in  the  cry 
that  he  uttered  corrected  their  error),  he  was  struck  by  a  chance 
arrow,  which  inflicted  a  mortal  wound.  He  bravely  persisted  in 
remaining  to  the  end  of  the  engagement,  but  expired  at  the  close 
of  the  day ;  and  his  death  was  followed  by  the  dispersion  of  the 
army.     His  body  was  brought  to  Samaria  and  buried  there.  * 

Ahab  was  succeeded  by  his  son  AHAZIAH,  who  imitated  his 
father  in  his  unfaithfulness  to  Jehovah,  and,  as  was  natural  in  a 

^  See  the  Moabite  Stone,  Appendix  B.  ^  See  p.  335. 

'  According  to  2  Ch.  xix.  1-3  he  was  rebuked  by  Jehu,  the  son  of  the  seer 
Hanani,  for  doing  so. 

*  There  is  a  discrepancy  between  /  ICg.  xxi,  19  and  xxii.  38  in  regard  to 
the  place  where  the  dogs  licked  up  the  blood  of  Ahab.  In  the  former  passage 
Elijah  predicts  that  this  will  occur  in  Jezreei^  the  scene  of  Naboth's  murder ; 
but  according  to  the  latter,  the  prediction  was  fulfilled  at  Samaria.  Instead 
of  the  statement  the  harlots  washed  themselves  {there)  the  LXX.  has  koX  aX 
vbpvai  iXovffauTO  iv  T(p  at/iart. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  339 

son  of  Jezebel,  countenanced  Baal  worship  (i  Kg.  xxii.  53).  His 
reign  was  a  very  brief  one,  and  marked  by  no  event  of  importance, 
save  the  continuation  of  the  Moabite  war.  Israel's  connection 
with,  or  rather  supremacy  over,  Judah  was  still  maintained,  and 
it  was  in  conjunction  with  Ahaziah  that  Jehoshaphat,  whose  con- 
trol over  Edom  was  as  yet  unimpaired,  built  ships  at  Ezion-geber, 
on  the  Gulf  of  Akaba,  to  develop  the  trade  with  Ophir.^  The 
ships,  however,  were  destroyed  by  a  storm ;  and  the  attempt,  in 
spite  of  the  wishes  of  the  Israelite  king,  was  not  renewed.  ^ 
Ahaziah  left  no  children,  and  in  consequence  one  of  his  brothers 
became  heir  to  the  throne. 

One  of  the  stories  that  gathered  round  the  prophet  Elijah  is  connected  with 
Ahaziah.  The  king  having  fallen  through  the  lattice  of  his  upper  chamber 
sent  to  enquire  of  Baal-zebub,  the  god  of  Ekron,  whether  he  would  recover 
from  the  injury  he  had  received.  In  consequence  of  this  disloyalty  to  Jehovah, 
Elijah,  meeting  with  the  royal  messengers,  foretold  the  king's  death.  In 
anger,  Ahaziah  sent  a  body  of  fifty  men  to  seize  him  in  his  dwelling  {2  Kg,  i.  9 
marg.)  on  the  summit  of  a  hill  ;^  but  the  prophet  called  down  fire  from  heaven 
which  destroyed  them.  A  second  body  of  fifty  met  with  the  same  fate ;  but 
the  captain  of  a  third  troop  interceded  for  his  soldiers'  lives  and  his  own  ;  and 
Elijah,  by  the  direction  of  an  angel,  allowed  himself  to  be  taken  to  the  king's 
presence,  and  there  repeated  his  prediction,  which  was  duly  accomplished 
(^A-^.  c.  i.). 

This  is  the  last  incident  related  of  Elijah's  career.  For  his  faithfulness  he 
was  not  suffered  to  die  like  the  rest  of  mankind,  but  was  taken  up  into  heaven 
by  a  whirlwind.  When  the  time  of  his  departure  drew  on,  he  went  down 
from  Gilgal,  through  Bethel,  to  Jericho  and  the  Jordan,  attended  by  Elisha, 
who  persisted  in  accompanying  him  in  spite  of  repeated  injunctions  to  remain 
behind.  When  arrived  at  the  Jordan,  Elijah  divided  the  river  by  smiting  it 
with  his  mantle,  and  he  and  Elisha  went  over  on  dry  ground.  The  region  to 
which  they  came  had  been  the  scene  of  Moses'  death.  When  arrived  there 
Elijah  bade  his  minister  ask  of  him  a  final  boon,  and  Elisha  desired  that  a 
double  portion  of  his  master's  spirit  might  rest  upon  him  (a  double  portion  of 
the  inheritance  being  the  customary  share  of  the  firstborn  son).  *  He  was 
told  that  his  petition  would  be  granted  only  if  he  stayed  till  the  end.  And  as 
they  talked,  there  appeared  horses  and  chariots  of  fire,  ^  which  parted  them 
both  asunder ;  and  Elijah  went  up  by  a  whirlwind  into  heaven.  And  Elisha 
saw  it,  and  he  cried,  ' '  My  father,  my  father,  the  chariots  of  Israel  and  the 
horsemen  thereof."^    Then  taking  up  the  prophet's  mantle,'  he  returned  to 

*  See  p.  300. 

^  2  Ch.  XX.  35  foil,  strangely  describes  Jehoshaphat  as  making  ships  at 
Ezion-geber  (on  the  Red  Sea)  to  go  to  Tarshish  (in  Spain)^  and  states  that  the 
shipwreck  was  attributed  by  the  prophet  Eliezer  to  the  share  which  the  idola- 
trous Ahaziah  had  in  the  proposed  expedition. 

»  Perhaps  Carmel.     *  See  p.  156.     »  Cf.  2  Kg.  vi.  17.     «  Cf.  2  Kg.  xiii.  14. 

7  The  mantle  was  the  symbol  of  prophetic  authority ;  see  /  Kg.  xix.  19, 
Zech.  xiii.  4-5. 


340  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Jordan,  and  smote  the  waters  with  it,  invoking  the  God  of  Elijah,  and  they 
again  divided  and  he  went  over.  At  Jericho  he  was  met  by  a  body  of  the 
sons  of  the  prophets,  who  acknowledged  him  to  be  his  master's  successor. 
These  men  sent  to  search  for  Elijah,  in  spite  of  the  protest  of  Elisha,  but  did 
not  find  him.  Elisha  whilst  tarrying  at  Jericho,  healed  an  unwholesome 
spring  by  casting  salt  into  it,  and  cured  the  soil  about  it  of  barrenness.  On 
proceeding  thence  to  Bethel  he  was  mocked  by  some  youths,  whom  he  cursed, 
and  in  consequence  a  number  of  them  were  torn  by  two  she-bears.  Thence 
he  went  to  mount  Carmel,  and  firom  thence  to  Samaria  {2  Kg.  c  iL). 

JEHORAM,  the  brother  and  successor  of  Ahaziah  on  the 
throne  of  Israel,  appears  not  to  have  been  a  personal  worshipper 
of  Baal  {2  Kg.  iii.  2-3,  but  contrast  x.  26),  though  Baal  worship 
was  still  prevalent  in  the  land,  and  perhaps  tolerated  by  the  king 
(2  Kg.  iii.  13).  His  first  undertaking  was  an  attempt  to  regain 
the  mastery  over  Moab,  which  (as  has  been  related)  had  rebelled 
against  Ahab,  and  had  annexed  several  Israelite  cities  on  the 
E.  of  Jordan.  The  fortification  of  these  rendered  difficult  an 
advance  into  Moab  from  the  N.W.  by  way  of  the  Jordan,  and 
accordingly  the  route  decided  upon  was  around  the  southern 
extremity  of  the  Dead  Sea.  This  was  made  feasible  by  the 
supremacy  which  Israel  still  exercised  over  Judah  ;  and  Jehosha- 
phat  the  Judaean  king,  with  his  vassal  the  king  of  Edom,^  furnished, 
as  usual,  a  body  of  auxiliaries.  But  in  the  desert  region  which 
the  united  forces  had  to  traverse,  they  had  a  narrow  escape  of 
perishing  by  thirst.  They  were  saved  from  disaster  by  heavy 
rains  in  the  country  of  Edom  behind  them,  which  brought  down 
water  sufficient  to  fill  a  number  of  trenches  which  the  prophet 
Elisha,  who  was  with  the  host,  and  had  foretold  the  event,  had 
directed  to  be  prepared.  Meantime  the  Moabites  had  gathered 
in  force  to  oppose  the  invasion.  Unaware  of  the  rainfall  which 
had  so  providentially  brought  relief  to  the  Israelites  and  their 
allies,  they  mistook  the  pools  of  water  (coloured  perhaps  by  the 
red  soil  of  Edom,  or  glinting  in  the  morning  sun)  for  blood,  and 
concluded  that  the  invaders  had  quarrelled  and  destroyed  each 
other  by  mutual  slaughter.  They  consequently  rushed  upon  the 
camp,  expecting  an  easy  prey;  but  were  met  by  a  determined 
attack,  which  in  their  confusion  they  were  unable  to  withstand. 
They  were  defeated  and  pursued ;  and  the  Israelites,  advancing 

^  Edom  had  only  recently  obtained  a  king  of  its  own  ;  cf.  2  Kg.  iii.  9  with 
/  Kg.  xxii.  47. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  341 

into  the  heart  of  the  country,  ravaged  it  in  all  directions.  The 
springs  were  stopped  up,  the  fruit  trees  felled,  and  the  cities  dis- 
mantled, Kir-hareseth  alone  being  excepted.  To  this  the  king  of 
Moab  had  probably  withdrawn,  and  was  shut  up  there.  He  made 
an  effort  to  break  out,  counting  upon  the  connivance  of  the  king 
of  Edom,  whose  presence  with  the  army  of  Jehoshaphat  was 
doubtless  due  to  compulsion ;  but  the  attempt  failed,  and  in  his 
distress,  he  sacrificed  his  eldest  son  to  propitiate  Chemosh  the 
Moabite  deity.  The  further  course  of  the  war  is  not  recorded; 
but  from  the  enigmatic  language  of  the  historian  {2  Kg.  iii.  27, 
end),  it  would  appear  that  the  invading  army  met  with  some 
serious  reverse,  which  caused  it  to  evacuate  the  country. 

The  tenor  of  events  next  succeeding  is  very  difficult  to  trace. 
The  historian's  narrative  has  the  prophet  Elisha  as  its  principal 
figure;  and  many  of  the  incidents  recorded  of  him  touch  the 
political  movements  of  the  time  only  remotely,  whilst  the  few 
references  to  them  which  actually  occur  are  far  from  helpful.  It 
appears,  however,  that  the  war  was  renewed  with  Syria,  which,  for 
a  while,  was  of  a  desultory  nature,  and  conducted  chiefly  by  means 
of  raids ;  though  eventually  it  assumed  a  more  regular  character, 
and  resulted  in  Syrian  successes. 

The  stories  related  of  Elisha  resemble  some  of  those  already  narrated  of 
Elijah.  Thus  he  is  said  to  have  multiplied  the  oil  of  a  poor  woman,  widow 
of  one  of  the  sons  of  the  prophets,^  in  order  that  she  might  therewith  pay  her 
creditor,  who  was  on  the  point  of  seizing  and  selling  her  children  for  bond- 
men {2  Kg.  iv.  1-7,  cf.  /  Kg.  xvii.  8-i6).  Next,  receiving  hospitality  from 
a  Shunammite  lady,  who  was  childless,  and  whose  husband  was  old,  he  fore- 
told that  she  should  have  a  son.  The  son  that  she  bore  in  accordance  with 
his  prediction  subsequently  died  whilst  yet  a  child  ;  but  was  restored  to  life 
by  the  prophet  {2  Kg.  iv.  8-27,  cf.  /  Kg.  xvii.  17-24).  Elisha  is  then 
recorded  to  have  rendered  harmless  a  mess  of  poisonous  pottage,  and  to 
have  fed  to  the  full  a  hundred  men  with  a  small  supply  of  bread  {2  Kg. 
iv.  38-44).  His  fame  having  penetrated  to  Syria  through  the  agency  of 
a  captive  Israelite  maid,  the  king  of  Syria  sent  Naaman  the  captain  of  his 
host,  who  was  a  leper,  to  be  healed  by  him.  Bidden  by  Elisha  to  wash 
seven  times  in  Jordan,  he  at  first  out  of  pride  refused  ;  but  eventually  yielding 
to  the  remonstrances  of  his  servants,  he  did  so,  and  the  leprosy  departed 
from  him.  On  leaving  for  his  own  country  he  begged  for  two  mules'  burden 
of  earth  taken  from  the  soil  of  Israel  (as  being  Jehovah's  ground)  that  he 
might  build  an  altar  to  the  God  who  had  restored  him  to  health.  Elisha 
having  refused  to  receive  any  present  from  the  grateful  Syrian,  Gehazi,  his 

*  Identified  by  Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  4,  2)  with  the  widow  of  Obadiah,  though 
there  is  nothing  in  /  Kg.  xviii.  4  to  show  that  Obadiah  was  one  of  the  sons  of 
the  prophets. 


342  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

servant,  determined  to  enrich  himself,  and  running  after  Naaman  when  the 
latter  was  on  his  homeward  journey,  obtained  a  gift  under  cover  of  a  lie ; 
but  on  returning  to  his  master's  presence,  was  taxed  with  his  deceit,  and 
in  retribution  was  smitten  with  the  disease  from  which  Naaman  had  just 
been  cured  {2  Kg.  c.  v. ).  On  another  occasion  Ehsha  was  with  the  sons  of 
the  prophets  as  they  were  building  a  new  dweUing-place,  when  it  chanced 
that  a  borrowed  axe-head  fell  into  the  water.  In  answer  to  an  appeal  from 
the  man  who  lost  it,  the  prophet  made  the  iron  to  swim,  and  so^  enabled 
it  to  be  recovered.  Again,  in  the  course  of  the  war  with  Syria,  he  informed 
the  king  of  Israel  from  time  to  time  of  the  enemy's  plans  and  moven^ents. 
In  consequence,  the  king  of  Syria  sent  horses  and  chariots  to  take  him  in 
the  city  (Dothan)  where  he  dwelt ;  so  that  when  EUsha's  servant  rose  in  the 
morning,  he  found  the  city  compassed  with  an  army.  In  answer  to  his 
alarmed  cry,  his  master  bade  him  have  no  fear ;  and  at  EUsha's  prayer, 
the  young  man's  eyes  were  opened  and  he  saw  horses  and  chariots  of  fire 
gathered  on  the  neighbouring  mountain  to  defend  the  prophet.  Then  Elisha 
prayed  that  the  Syrians  might  be  smitten  with  blindness ;  and  in  that  condi- 
tion he  led  them  to  Samaria,  and  so  placed  them  in  the  power  of  their 
enemies.  He  would  not,  however,  allow  the  king  of  Israel  to  destroy  them, 
but  bade  him  treat  them  kindly,  and  then  sent  them  away  to  their  own 
land  ;  so  that  the  bands  of  Syria  came  no  more  into  the  land  of  Israel. 
After  this,  Benhadad,  the  king  of  Syria,  besieged  Samaria,  and  so  closely 
was  the  city  invested  that  it  became  a  prey  to  famine,  and  the  inhabitants 
were  reduced  to  the  most  terrible  extremities.  The  king  in  his  despair  sought 
to  wreak  vengeance  upon  Elisha,  but  the  messenger  despatched  to  slay  him 
was  detained  until  (apparently)  the  order  was  countermanded  by  the  king 
who  followed  behind,^  and  the  prophet  foretold  that  relief  was  close  at  hand. 
His  words  were  received  with  incredulity  by  one  of  the  king's  captains; 
who  was  thereupon  told  that  he  should  see  it,  but  not  share  it.  EUsha's 
prediction  was  fulfiUed  by  the  Syrians  suddenly  raising  the  siege,  in  con- 
sequence of  an  alarm  that  the  Hittites  and  the  Eg>'ptians  had  been  hired 
to  attack  them.  In  their  panic  they  abandoned  their  camp,  which  was 
discovered  to  be  deserted  by  four  leprous  wretches  who  found  their  way  into 
it ;  and  its  supplies  became  the  spoil  of  the  beleaguered  citizens.  The 
incredulous  officer  was  appointed  by  the  king  to  have  charge  of  the  city 
gate,  and  so  great  was  the  throng  of  people  who  poured  through  it  that  he 
was  crushed  to  death,  thus  verifying  the  word  of  EUsha  (2  Kg.  c.  vi.,  vH.). 
Next,  Elisha  gave  warning  to  the  woman,  whose  son  he  had  raised  to  Ufe, 
of  the  approach  of  a  seven  years'  famine ;  whereupon  she  retired  to  the 
land  of  the  Philistines.  At  the  end  of  the  period  she  returned,  but  found 
her  property  appropriated  by  others.  The  king  of  Israel  was  being  told  by 
Gehazi  of  EUsha's  great  deeds  when  the  woman  made  her  appeal  for  the 
restoration  of  her  possessions ;  and  when  Gehazi  informed  him  of  what 
EUsha  had  done  for  her,  the  king  commanded  that  all  she  had  lost  should 
be  made  good.  After  this  Elisha  went  to  Damascus,  where  Benhadad  the 
king  of  Syria  was  sick  ;  and  the  latter  sent  his  servant  Hazael  to  him  to 
enquire  whether  he  would  be  restored  to  health.  In  answer,  Elisha  declared 
that  he  would  recover  of  his  disease,'^  but  would  nevertheless  surely  die; 
and  then,  weeping,  explained  to  Hazael,  who  asked  why  he  wept,  that  he 

^  In  2  Kg.  vi.  33  it  has  been  proposed  to  read  the  king  for  the  messenger 
(the  diff"erence  in  the  original  being  slight) ;  cf.  Jos.  Ant.  ix.  4,  4. 

*  So  one  reading  in  2  Kg.  viii.  10  (followed  by  Jos.  Ant.  ix.  4,  6) ;  but 
another  reading  gives  Say^  Thou  shalt  not  recover. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  343 

i^ias  destined  to  do  much  evil  to  Israel,  and  would  become  king  over 
Syria.  Hazael  reported  to  Benhadad  the  first  part  of  the  prophet's  predic- 
tion, and  next  proceeded  to  bring  about  the  second  part  by  smothering  the 
sick  man  with  the  coverlet  of  his  bed ;  and  then  became  king  in  his  room 
(^  Kg.  viii.  1-15). 

These  stories  are  somewhat  disconnected,  and  in  places  inconsistent.  For 
instance  the  alleged  cessation  of  the  Syrian  invasions  (vi.  23)  is  contradicted 
by  the  siege  of  Samaria  (ver.  24),  whilst  of  the  life-long  leprosy  of  Gehazi 
affirmed  in  v.  27,  no  consciousness  is  shown  in  the  later  narrative  viii.  1-6. 
The  king  of  Israel  is  nowhere  named ;  but  presumably  Jehoram  is  meant. 

The  war  with  Syria  that  has  been  alluded  to  seems  to  have 
borne  a  general  resemblance  to  the  earlier  conflict  which  took 
place  in  the  reign  of  Ahab.  Samaria,  for  the  second  time,  sus- 
tained a  siege,  and  for  the  second  time  the  besieging  forces 
failed  to  reduce  it.  On  the  last  occasion,  if  one  of  the  stories 
just  related  is  to  be  accepted  in  its  main  details,  the  withdrawal 
of  the  Syrians  is  represented  as  due  to  the  fear  of  a  relieving 
force  of  Hittite  and  Egyptian  mercenaries.  The  combination, 
however,  is  rather  a  strange  one;  and  it  has  been  conjectured 
that  Egypt  {Mizraim)  is  a  mistake  for  Musre^  a  country  near 
mount  Amanus,  and  adjoining  the  land  of  the  Hittites,  which  is 
mentioned  in  the  Assyrian  account  of  the  battle  of  Karkar 
(p.  335).  The  raising  of  the  siege  of  Samaria,  however  brought 
about,  must  have  been  followed  by  the  almost  complete  evacua- 
tion by  Syria  of  the  Israelite  territory,  for  the  scene  of  the  next 
incident  in  the  war  was  the  remote  eastern  frontier. 

Meanwhile  Jehoshaphat,  the  king  of  Judah,  had  been  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son  JEHORAM.  As  has  been  already  stated,  he 
had  married  Athaliah,  the  daughter  of  Ahab;  and  her  evil 
influence  quickly  showed  itself  in  the  deterioration  of  the 
national  religion.  His  reign  was  marked  by  two  disasters.  An 
outbreak  of  hostilities  on  the  part  of  the  PhiUstines  resulted  in 
the  loss  of  Libnah;  whilst  Edom,  which  had  doubtless  been 
long  disaffected,  revolted,  and  in  spite  of  a  defeat  inflicted  upon 
it  by  Jehoram  at  a  place  called  Zair,^  where  he  was  surrounded 
by  the  enemy,  succeeded  in  gaining  its  independence.  These 
public  calamities  were  accompanied  by  personal  bereavements,  all 
his  sons,  with  the  exception  of  the  youngest,  being  cut  ofi"  by  a 
raid   made   by   some  Arabian   marauders   {2    Ch.  xxi.   16-17). 

^  Identified  by  some  with  a  wady  on  the  S.W.  shore  of  the  Dead  Sea;  the 
name  is  omitted  in  Chronicles  {2  Ch.  xxi. ). 


344  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Broken  by  misfortunes  and  disease  {2  Ch.  xxi.  18-19),  he  seems 
to  have  occupied  the  throne  only  a  few  years. 

According  to  2  Ch.  xxL  2-4  Jehoram  had  six  brethren,  who  are  said  to 
have  received  from  their  father  Jehoshaphat  gifts  of  money  and  fenced  cities  ; 
but  Jehoram,  as  soon  as  he  came  to  the  throne,  put  them  all  to  death.  The 
calamities  which  befell  him  subsequently  are  further  related  to  have  been 
announced  in  a  writing  which  came  to  him  from  the  prophet  Elijah,  in  which 
they  were  described  as  a  punishment  both  for  his  fratricides  and  his  idolatry. 
The  fact  that  Elisha  figures  in  the  history  of  Jehoshaphat,  Jehoram's  father, 
makes  it  very  improbable  that  EUjah  was  at  this  time  alive.  The  statement 
{2  Ch.  xxi.  20)  that  Jehoram  was  not  buried  in  the  sepulchres  of  the  kings  is 
opposed  to  the  natural  sense  of  2  Kg.  viii.  24 ;  and  is  open  to  suspicion  (c£ 
the  similar  discrepancies  between  2  Ch.  xxiv.  25  and  2  Kg.  xii.  21,  and 
between  2  Ch.  xxviii.  27  and  2  Kg.  xvi.  20). 

Jehoram's  successor  was  his  only  surviving  son  AHAZIAH  (or 
JEHOAHAZ^),  who  became  king  at  the  age  of  twenty-two.  His 
mother  was  Athaliah  the  daughter  of  Ahab,  and  to  the  religious 
practices  which  she  had  introduced  into  the  nation  the  new  king 
adhered.  But  his  reign  was  too  short  to  be  eventful,  and  the 
only  incidents  in  it  which  claim  attention  are  those  connected 
with  his  death. 

It  has  already  been  related  how  Benhadad  the  king  of  Syria 
was  murdered  by  his  servant  Hazael,  who  thereupon  raised  him- 
self to  the  throne.  His  accession  made  no  change  in  the  hostile 
relations  which  had  so  long  prevailed  between  the  Syrians  and 
Israel ;  and  the  possession  of  Ramoth  Gilead  was  once  more 
disputed  between  the  two  nations.  The  city  at  this  time  appears 
to  have  been  in  the  hands  of  Israel;  but  it  was  attacked  by 
Hazael,  and  in  the  war  that  ensued  Jehoram,  like  his  prede- 
cessors, called  upon  the  king  of  Judah  to  furnish  him  with  help. 
In  the  course  of  the  campaign  Jehoram  received  wounds  which 
necessitated  his  return  to  his  palace  at  Jezreel,^  the  defence  of 
Ramoth  Gilead  being  entrusted  to  his  officers.  In  the  king's 
enforced  retirement  from  the  army  the  resentment  provoked 
amongst  the  followers  of  Jehovah  by  Jezebel's  persecution  of  the 
prophets  and  her  murder  of  Naboth  at  length  found  its  oppor- 
tunity.    Amongst  those  present  with  the  army  at  Ramoth  was 

^  See  2  Ch.  xxi.  17.  In  2  Ch.  xxii.  6  he  is  called  (probably  by  a  textual 
error)  Azariah.  His  age  at  his  accession  is  stated  as  forty-two,  though  his 
father  was  only  forty  when  he  died. 

*  The  Ramah  of  2  Kg.  viii.  29  must  be  the  same  as  Ramoth  Gilead. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  345 

Jehu,^  who  had  been  one  of  the  body-guard  of  Ahab,  and  who 

had  heard  EHjah's  denunciation  of   the  execution   of   Naboth 

(P-  337)  >   ^"d  to  h^"^  Elisha  sent  a  messenger  declaring  him 

divinely  commissioned  to  destroy  the  house  of  Ahab,  and  to 

avenge  the  murdered  prophets.     The  envoy  privately  anointed 

him  king ;  and  when  Jehu  related  to  his  fellow-officers  what  had 

happened,  he  was  by  them  at  once  acknowledged  as  sovereign. 

Thereupon  preventing  any  from  leaving  the  city  to  carry  tidings 

of  the  revolution,  he  proceeded  with  all  haste  to  Jezreel,  where 

Jehoram  lay.     Ahaziah  of  Judah  had  come  down  to  visit  his 

relation  and  ally;  and  when  the  messengers,  despatched  to  enquire 

the   import   of   Jehu's   hasty  approach,    were   detained   by   the 

usurper,   the  two  kings  went  forth  to  meet  him.      Jehu   soon 

revealed  the  purpose  of  his  arrival ;  and  as  Jehoram  turned  to 

flee,  he  slew  him  with  an  arrow,  directing  his  body  to  be  cast 

on  to  the  land  so  wrongfully  appropriated  by  his  father  Ahab,  to 

become,   hke   Naboth's,   the    prey   of   dogs.      Ahaziah,    as    he 

endeavoured  to  escape,  was  pursued  by  Jehu  and  by  his  orders 

smitten  in  his  chariot.     He  fell  mortally  wounded,  and  died  at 

Megiddo,  whence  his  corpse  was  afterwards  taken  by  his  servants 

to  Jerusalem  and  buried  there.     Jehu  then  returned  to  Jezreel, 

and  as  he  entered  the  city  he  was  observed  by  Jezebel  from  a 

window,  who  tauntingly  saluted  him  as  a  second  Zimri.     Jehu 

thereupon  ordered  some  eunuchs,  who  appeared  in  answer  to 

his  call,  to  throw  her  down ;  and  this  being  done,  he  drove  his 

horses  over  her  body,  which,  like  the  king's,  was  devoured  by 

the  dogs.2 

In  regard  to  the  death  of  Ahaziah  the  Chronicler  differs  from  the  writer  of 
Kings,  and  states  that  he  had  concealed  himself  at  Samaria,  and  being 
captured  there,  was  brought  to  Jehu,  who  ordered  him  to  be  executed 
(-2  Ch.  xxii.  9).  His  death  is  represented  as  a  judgment  for  allying  himself 
with  Joram. 

With  the  double  purpose  of  completing  the  vengeance  due  for 
the  murder  of  Jehovah's  prophets  and  of  securing  his  newly-won 

*•  Jehu,  though  often  styled  the  son  of  Nimshi  (/  Kg.  xix.  i6  etc.),  was 
really  son  of  Jehoshaphat  and  grandson  of  Nimshi  {2  Kg,  ix.  14). 

"^  In  2  Kg-,  ix.  36  Elijah  is  represented  as  stating  that  the  dogs  should 
devour  Jezebel  t'n  the  portion  of  Jezreel  (LXX.  iv  t-q  /xepldi  IcrpaT^X),  but  in 
/  Kg.  xxi.  23  the  scene  of  her  doom  is  by  the  rampart  of  Jezreel  (LXX. 
[xx.  23]  iv  ry  irpomx^GiKxri  rod  'la-pai^X). 


346  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

throne  from  possible  rivals,  Jehu  next  proceeded  to  destroy  all  the 
remaining  descendants  of  Ahab.  These,  numbering  seventy  per- 
sons (many  of  them,  no  doubt,  sons  of  Jehoram),  were  at  Samaria 
under  the  care  of  guardians ;  and  by  them  were  all  executed 
under  Jehu's  orders,  who  thus  made  some  of  the  leading  citizens 
of  the  capital  accomplices  in  his  overthrow  of  the  royal  house. 
He  then  put  to  death  all  the  friends  and  adherents  of  the  dead 
king  whom  he  found  at  Jezreel.  Jehu's  bloodthirstiness  did  not 
stop  here.  Going  in  person  from  Jezreel  to  Samaria,  he  en- 
countered certain  relatives  of  Ahaziah,  king  of  Judah,  forty-two  in 
number,-  who,  unaware  of  what  had  happened,  were  on  their  way 
to  pay  a  visit  to  the  court  at  Jezreel,  and  directing  them  to  be 
seized,  had  them  slaughtered,  and  their  bodies  thrust  into  a  well. 
He  next  took  measures  to  carry  out  the  religious  reformation 
which  the  dynastic  revolution  was  intended  to  promote ;  and  in 
this  work  he  joined  to  himself  a  certain  Jehonadab,  son  of 
Rechab,  belonging  to  a  Kenite  family,  which  had  not  only 
remained  faithful  to  Jehovah  during  the  recent  apostasy,  but  even 
dissociated  itself  altogether  from  the  vintage  festivals  which  were 
a  special  feature  of  Baal  worship  {Jer.  xxxv.).  To  accomplish 
his  purpose  he  stooped  to  craft.  Professing  to  be,  like  his  pre- 
decessor on  the  throne,  a  votary  of  Baal,  he  summoned  all  the 
prophets,  priests,  and  devotees  of  the  deity ^  to  a  festival  in  a 
large  temple,  of  which  he  secured  the  doors;  and  then  sent  in 
a  body  of  his  guards  with  orders  to  massacre  them.  The 
symbols  and  shrines  connected  with  Baal  worship  were  after- 
wards destroyed,  and  the  site  of  them  desecrated. 

The  religion  of  the  Phoenician  Baal,  together  with  the  dynasty 
that  introduced  it,  was  thus  extirpated  by  bloodshed;  and  the 
approval  which  the  violence  attending  its  suppression  received 
from  the  prophets  shows  what  fierceness  still  entered  into 
the  religion  of  Jehovah.     Another  generation  had  to  pass  before 

^  In  2  Kg,  X.  I  the  rulers  of  Jezreel  must  be  an  error  for  the  rulers  of 
Samaria  (see  ver.  6)  as  read  by  the  LXX.    The  Vulgate  has  optimates  civitatis. 

"^  Described  in  2  Ch.  xxii.  8  as  sons  of  the  brethren  of  Ahaziah,  i.e.  sons 
01  the  eldest  sons  of  Jehoram  who  had  been  slain  by  Arabian  marauders 
{2  Ch.  xxii.  i). 

^  In  spite  of  the  statement  respecting  Jehoram  in  2  Kg.  iii.  2,  the  influence 
of  Jezebel  still  maintained  in  the  land  the  cult  of  the  Zidonian  Baal,  and  it 
was  this  that  Jehu  proceeded  to  extinguish. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  347 

a  higher  conception  of  God  began  to  prevail  in  Israel,  or 
Jehu's  mercilessness  met  with  a  fitting  condemnation  from  His 
ministers  (see  Hos,  i.  4).  At  the  same  time  it  must  be  recog- 
nised that  the  religion  of  Baal,  under  the  influence  of  the  foreign 
princess  Jezebel,  had  become  highly  aggressive ;  and  that  in  the 
contest  which  the  prophets  of  Jehovah  waged  against  it,  the 
severe  measures  they  employed  are,  even  if  judged  by  a  higher 
standard  than  theirs,  not  without  excuse. 

JEHU,  when  securely  seated  on  the  throne,  restored  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  to  its  former  supremacy.  But  it  retained 
the  sensuous  form  under  which  it  was  practised  in  the  tim.e  of 
Jeroboam,  the  golden  calves  set  up  by  that  king  being  still  the 
objects  of  popular  veneration.  The  continued  association  of 
Jehovah's  service  with  such  coarse  emblems  must  have  material- 
ised, if  not  brutalised,  the  religion  of  the  nation,  and  proved  a 
serious  obstacle  to  ethical  and  spiritual  progress.  And  if  Jehu's 
usurpation  thus  failed  to  accomplish  a  complete  religious  refor- 
mation, it  had,  from  a  political  point  of  view,  wrought  positive 
mischief.  The  overthrow  of  Ahab's  house  was  not  effected 
without  the  destruction  of  many  of  its  adherents ;  and  the  loss 
of  strength  which  this  entailed  on  the  nation  weakened  it  for  the 
conflicts  with  foreign  powers  which  were  in  store  for  it.  As  has 
been  already  stated,  Assyria  had  become  active  in  the  reign  of 
Jehoram,  though  it  was  not  Israel  but  Syria  which  first  became 
embroiled  with  it.  In  842  Shalmaneser  II.  inflicted  a  severe  defeat 
upon  Hazael,  the  Syrian  king,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  mount 
Senir  (Hermon),  and  besieged  Damascus.  He  then  advanced 
to  the  coast  and  received  tribute  from  several  Phoenician  cities, 
Tyre,  Zidon,  and  Byblus.  The  relations  which  had  existed 
between  Ahab  and  Zidon  would  prevent  Jehu  from  uniting  with 
the  latter  in  defence  of  Phoenicia;  and  the  hostility  of 
Shalmaneser  towards  Syria,  which  had  so  long  been  Israel's 
most  formidable  enemy,  would  dispose  the  Israelite  king  to  make 
friends,  if  possible,  of  the  invader.  Accordingly  Jehu  also  gave 
tribute  to  the  Assyrian  king;  and  on  one  of  the  cuneiform 
inscriptions  of  Shalmaneser^  there  appears  a  list  of  the  gifts  he 
sent — bars  of  silver  and  gold,  a  golden  bowl,  golden  goblets, 

*  On  the  Black  Obelisk  found  at  Nimroud,  and  now  in  the  British  Museum. 


348  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

golden  pitchers,  and  other  articles.  The  enumeration  suggests 
that  the  "  tribute  "  (as  the  inscription  terms  it)  was  rather  of  the 
nature  of  a  present,  made  with  a  view  to  secure  the  favour  of 
Assyria.  Any  hope,  however,  which  Jehu  cherished  of  obtaining 
Assyrian  protection  against  Syria  proved  illusory.  Hazael,  when 
he  recovered  from  the  defeat  alluded  to  above,  attacked  Israel, 
and  overran  the  whole  of  Gilead  and  Bashan  {2  Kg.  x.  32-33), 
committing  great  barbarities  {Am.  i.  3,  cf.  2  Kg.  viii.  12).  Details 
of  the  war,  however,  are  lacking,^  and  the  rest  of  Jehu's  reign  is 
passed  over  by  the  historian  in  silence.  He  was  succeeded  by 
his  son  JEHOAHAZ,  who,  in  the  conduct  of  religion,  followed 
in  his  father's  footsteps.  Under  him  the  political  fortunes  of 
Israel  sank  to  a  very  low  ebb.  The  .Syrian  war  was  continued 
by  Hazael  and  his  son  Benhadad  III. ;  and  eventually  Jehoahaz 
was  reduced  to  a  condition  of  subserviency,  being  only  allowed 
to  maintain  an  army  of  a  certain  strength  (10,000  infantry, 
50  horsemen,  and  10  chariots).  It  is  possible  that  to  this  reign 
also  belongs  the  barbarous  raid  of  the  Ammonites  referred  to 
in  Am.  i.  13;  but  no  particulars  of  the  disasters  sustained  have 
been  preserved. 

Meanwhile,  the  family  of  Ahab,  after  losing  the  throne  of 
Israel,  continued  to  enjoy,  on  the  death  of  Ahaziah,  a  short 
period  of  power  in  Judah,  and  sheltered  there  the  Baal  worship 
which  for  a  time  had  been  extinguished  in  the  Northern  Kingdom. 
ATHALIAH,  the  daughter  of  Ahab,  had,  as  the  queen-mother  of 
Ahaziah,  already  occupied  a  position  of  influence  and  dignity; 
but  on  the  death  of  her  son,  her  ambition  led  her  to  seize  the 
crown.  She  secured  her  possession  of  it  by  putting  to  death 
all  her  surviving  grandchildren  with  the  exception  of  the 
youngest,  Joash,  who  was  saved  by  Jehosheba,  half-sister  ^  of 
the  dead  king  and  wife  of  Jehoiada  the  chief  priest  (2  Ch, 
xxii.  11),  and  was  concealed  by  her  in  the  Temple.  Of  Athaliah's 
tenure  of  power  nothing  is  recorded  save  her  protection  of  Baal 
worship,   by   the   side   of  which,   nevertheless,   the   religion   of 

*  The  loss  of  the  cities  of  Jair,  mentioned  in  /  Ch.  ii.  23,  probably  took 
place  at  this  time. 

*  This  is  implied  by  Josephus  {Ant.  ix.  7.  i)  who  styles  her  'Oxofi^  (Ahaziah) 
hfioTrdrpios  d5eX07;.  The  Chronicler  gives  her  name  as  Jehoshabcath  {2  Ch. 
xxii.  II). 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  349 

Jehovah  maintained  its  existence.     Her  usurpation  was  brought 

to  an  end  by  a  revolution  organised  by  the  priest  Jehoiada.     He 

formed  a  plot  with  the  captains  of  the  Carian  guards  and  other 

officers  who  were  on  duty  at  the  Temple,  and  appealed  to  their 

instincts  of  loyalty  by  showing  them  the  youthful  heir  to  the 

throne.      After  having    concentrated  at    the    Temple   a  larger 

number  of   their   troops    than   usual   by  arranging  that  those 

whose  turn   it  was   to   be  relieved  should  not  withdraw,  and 

placing  some  of  them  to  watch  the  communications  with  the 

Palace  and  the  other  entrances  of  the  Temple,  whilst  disposing 

the  rest  around  the  person  of  the  young  prince,  he  proceeded 

to  crown   the   latter^   and  to  display  him  to  the  people  who 

thronged  the  Temple  courts.     Athaliah,  hearing  the  shouts  with 

which   the    king   was    saluted,   hastened   to    the   scene,   crying 

"  Treason  ! " ;    but  by  the  direction   of  Jehoiada,  she  was  at 

once  seized  and  hurried  forth  from  the  sacred  precincts,  and 

then  put  to  death. 

The  arrangements  made  by  Jehoiada  in  connection  with  the  coronation 
of  Joash  and  the  death  of  Athaliah,  as  described  in  2  Kg.  xi.  4-16,  are 
obscure.  In  ver.  5,  6,  the  "three  parts"  of  the  guards  are  probably 
subdivisions  of  the  one  company  which,  in  ordinary  course,  was  to  relieve 
the  other  two  which  kept  watch  at  the  Temple  on  the  Sabbath.  Some  think 
that  this  company  was  posted  at  the  Palace,  to  confine  Athahah  there,  whilst 
the  two,  which  would  otherwise  have  been  relieved,  were  alone  kept  at  the 
Temple.  But  ver.  9  suggests  that  all  the  guards  were  collected  at  the  Temple, 
and  ver.  13  shows  that  Athaliah  was  free  to  leave  the  Palace.  The  presence, 
in  the  Temple  and  by  the  altar,  of  soldiers  and  even  foreign  mercenaries 
is  altogether  inconsistent  with  the  regulations  of  the  Priestly  code  of  the 
Pentateuch ;  and  the  Chronicler,  in  consequence,  whilst  naming  the  "  captains 
of  hundreds  "  represents  them  as  collecting  from  all  Judah  a  body  of  Levites^ 
who,  with  the  priests,  were  alone  to  enter  the  Temple  to  protect  the  king 
(2  Ch,  xxiii.  1-15). 

The  accession  of  JEHOASH  or  JOASH  was  followed  by  a 
religious  reformation.  During  the  king's  minority  (he  was  only 
seven  when  he  came  to  the  throne)  the  chief  power  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  priest  Jehoiada,  who  acted  as  his  guardian ;  and 
the  first  care  of  the  latter  was  to  put  an  end  to  the  false 
worship  which  had  gained  an  entrance  into  the  land  during  the 
previous  three  reigns.     He  then   brought  about  a  renewal  of 

^  In  -2  Kg.  xi.  12  for  put  upon  him  the  crown  and  {gave  him)  the  testimony 

should  probably  be  substituted,  by  a  slight  alteration  in  the  Heb. ,  put  upon 
him  the  crown  and  the  bracelets  (for  the  combination  of  crown  and  bracelets 
as  the  insignia  of  royalty  cf.  2  Sam.  i.  10) ;  see  Wellhausen,  Proleg.  p.  393  note. 


350  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  solemn  covenant  whereby  the  king  and  the  people  bound 
themselves  to  serve  Jehovah;  made  a  compact  between  the 
sovereign  and  his  subjects;  and  effected  a  restoration  of  the 
Temple,  which  had  fallen  into  disrepair,  and  even  (according  to 
2  Ch.  xxiv.  7)  been  wantonly  injured.  Of  the  external  history 
of  the  country  during  this  reign  little  is  recounted  in  detail. 
But  before  the  close  of  it  the  inroads  of  the  Syrians  into  the 
territory  of  Israel  (previously  related)  began  to  threaten  Judah. 
Hazael,  advancing  along  the  maritime  plain,  penetrated  south- 
wards as  far  as  the  PhiHstine  city  of  Gath,  whence  he  con- 
templated an  attack  upon  Jerusalem.  He  only  relinquished 
it  on  receiving  from  Joash  a  quantity  of  treasure,  to  provide 
which  both  the  Temple  and  the  royal  palace  had  to  be  despoiled. 
Joash  subsequently  fell  a  victim  to  assassination.  Two  of  his 
servants,  named  Jozacar  and  Jehozabad,  conspired  against  him 
and  slew  him ;  but  as  he  was  succeeded  in  the  normal  way  by 
his  son,  the  murder  was  probably  due  to  private  malice  and  not 
public  discontent. 

In  regard  to  the  repair  of  the  Temple  undertaken  in  this  reign,  it  is 
represented  in  2  Kg.  xii.  4  foil,  that  the  priests  were  expected  to  apply 
to  the  purpose  the  money  which  they  ordinarily  received  for  (i)  the  provision 
of  articles  dedicated  to  the  Temple  service,  (2)  the  redemption  of  vows 
(of.  Lev.  xxvii.  2  foil.),  (3)  free-will  offerings.  They  failed,  however,  to 
devote  the  money  to  this  object,  and  the  duty  of  restoration  was  accordingly 
taken  out  of  their  hands,  whilst  they  were  forbidden  to  receive  from  the 
people  anything  except  what  was  paid  for  guilt-  and  sin-offerings.  Then 
the  expense  of  the  repairs,  instead  of  being  met  as  originally  intended, 
was  defrayed  by  offerings  contributed  by  the  people  for  this  special  end,  and 
put  into  a  chest  placed  near  the  altar.  According  to  2  Ch.  xxiv.  4  foil., 
the  king  at  the  outset  sent  the  priests  and  Levites  throughout  the  country 
to  collect  the  money  ;  but  they  were  so  dilatory  that  the  king  made  arrange- 
ments for  the  people's  contributions  to  be  received  at  the  Temple  gate.  In 
their  contributions  (according  to  the  same  authority)  the  half-shekel  paid  by 
every  Israelite  (see  Ex.  xxx.  13)  was  also  included. 

Of  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Joash  a  much  more  extensive  account  is  fur- 
nished by  Chronicles  {2  Ch.  xxiv.  17  foil.)  than  is  contained  in  Kings.  After  the 
death  of  Jehoiada,  the  princes  gained  the  king's  ear,  and  idolatry  began  to  prevail 
again  ;  and  when  Zechariah  the  son  of  Jehoiada  raised  his  voice  against  it,  he 
was  stoned  in  the  Temple  court  by  the  command  of  the  king.  The  Syrian 
invasion  mentioned  above  (which  is  described  as  consisting  of  a  small  company, 
into  whose  hands  Jehovah  delivered  a  very  great  host  of  Judseans)  is  regarded 
as  a  judgment  upon  Joash ;  and  his  death  by  his  two  servants  (here  called 
Zabad  and  Jehozabad)  is  ascribed  to  revenge  for  the  son  of  Jehoiada.  The 
historian  of  Kings  not  only  does  not  relate,  but  could  not  have  known  what 
is  here  stated,  which  else  must  have  prevented  him  from  applying  to  Joash 
even  the  qualified  praise  implied  in  xiv.  3. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  351 

In  Israel  Jehoahaz^  was  succeeded  by  JEHOASH^  under 
whom  the  degradation  which  the  Northern  Kingdom  had 
suffered  at  the  hands  of  Syria  began  to  be  removed.  This 
was  largely  due  to  the  renewal  of  activity  on  the  part  of 
Assyria.  The  successors  of  Shalmaneser  II.  were  Samsi- 
ramman  IV.  (823-811)  and  Ramman-nirari  III  (810-782),  and 
in  803  the  last-named  besieged  Damascus ;  and  the  pressure 
of  this  war  made  Syria  less  able  to  retain  its  hold  upon  the 
territory  of  Israel.  Jehoash,  though,  like  his  predecessors,  he 
maintained  the  calf  -  worship,  had  friendly  relations  with  the 
prophet  Elisha,  who  was  now  a  man  of  advanced  age;  and  to 
the  king  Elisha  announced  that  he  would  obtain  a  series  of 
victories  over  the  oppressors  of  his  country.  As  he  lay  on  his 
death-bed,  he  sent  for  Jehoash,  and  directing  him  to  take  bow 
and  arrows,  he  bade  him  shoot  through  the  window  eastward; 
and  as  he  shot,  the  prophet  predicted  Israel's  coming  success 
over  the  eastern  power.  Then  he  commanded  the  king  to  smite 
with  the  arrows  upon  the  ground,  and  Jehoash  smote  thrice  and 
stayed;  whereupon  Elisha,  angry  at  his  desisting,  declared  that 
the  king's  victories  should  be  limited  to  three.  The  result  of 
these  triumphs  was  the  recovery  from  the  Syrians  of  those 
Israelite  cities  on  the  E.  of  the  Jordan  ^  which  they  had  captured 
from  Jehoahaz.  It  is  probable  that  Jehoash,  in  the  course  of 
this  contest  with  Syria,  found  it  expedient  to  tender  his  sub- 
mission to  the  Assyrians;  and  Ramman-nirari,  in  his  inscrip- 
tions, represents  Israel,  together  with  Tyre,  Zidon,  Edom,  and 
Philistia  as  paying  tribute  to  him,  though  the  tribute  may  well 
have  been  merely  nominal. 

The  Syrian  war  carried  on  during  this  reign  gave  the  Moabites 
an  opportunity  for  inflicting  injury  upon  their  Israelite  neigh- 
bours, of  which  they  were  not  slow  to  take  advantage;  and  it 
seems  probable  that  their  raiding  expeditions  extended  even  to 
the  district  west  of  Jordan. 

1  See  p.  348. 

*  The  Aphek  named  as  the  scene  of  Joash's  victory  in  2  Kg,  xiii.  17  is 
probably  identical  with  the  Aphek  of  /  Kg.  xx.  26,  which  was  on  the  E. 
of  Jordan. 


352  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

It  is  related  that  during  one  of  the  Moabite  raids,  alluded  to  above,  a  party 
of  men  who  were  carrying  a  corpse  to  burial,  on  perceiving  the  approach  of  a 
plundering  band,  hurriedly  cast  the  body  into  the  grave  of  Elisha  (now  dead), 
and  that  on  touching  the  bones  of  Elisha,  the  dead  man  revived.  The  site  of 
Elisha's  sepulchre  is  not  stated,  but  if  he  was  buried  at  his  native  place  Abel- 
meholah,  which  was  situated  near  Bethshan,  the  presence  of  Moabites  in  its 
neighbourhood  indicates  that  the  invaders  had  crossed  the  Jordan. 

The  contemporary  of  Jehoash  on  the  throne  of  Judah  was 
AMAZIAH,  who  succeeded  to  the  crown  on  the  death  of  his 
father.  The  murderers  of  the  latter  he  at  once  executed;  but 
the  higher  ethical  standard  of  this  age,  as  compared  with  earlier 
times,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  the  punishment  which  was 
inflicted  upon  the  guilty  conspirators  was  not  extended  to  their 
children.  The  first  military  venture  of  the  new  king  had  as  its 
object  the  re-conquest  of  Edom.  This  country,  as  mentioned 
above,  seems  to  have  felt  the  power  of  Assyria ;  and  Amaziah, 
in  consequence,  may  have  found  his  task  of  subjugating  it  light- 
ened. He  defeated  the  Edomites  with  great  loss,  and  captured 
the  city  of  Sela  (Petra),^  which  he  re-named  Joktheel.  This 
success,  coupled  with  the  calamities  sustained  by  Israel  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoahaz,  encouraged  Amaziah  to  renounce  the  sub- 
servient position  which  Judah  had  so  long  occupied  towards  the 
Northern  Kingdom  ;  and  he  proposed  to  Jehoash  a  deliberate  trial 
of  strength  with  a  view  to  settling  their  political  relations.  In 
spite  of  the  candid  advice  which  Jehoash  gave  him  in  the  form 
of  an  apologue  {2  Kg.  xiv.  9),  he  persisted  in  his  purpose ;  and 
the  forces  of  the  two  nations  met  at  Bethshemesh.  In  the  battle 
which  ensued,  Amaziah  was  not  only  defeated  but  captured. 
The  victorious  enemy  proceeded  with  him  to  Jerusalem,  where 
part  of  the  wall  facing  the  north  was  dismantled,^  so  that  the 
Judaean  capital  might  be  undefended  on  that  side ;  and  Jehoash 
only  returned  home  when  he  had  received  a  heavy  indemnity,  as 
well  as  hostages  as  security  against  further  provocation.  Amaziah 
himself,  when  the  conditions  of  peace  were  fulfilled,  was  restored 
to  the  throne,  and  if  the  synchronism  of  Kings  is  even  approxi- 
mately correct,  outlived  his  conqueror  by  several  years.     Eventu- 

1  The  loss  sustained  by  the  Edomites  is  placed  at  10,000,  and  the  same 
number  are  said  {2  Ch.  xxv.  12)  to  have  been  killed  in  cold  blood. 

'  2  Kg.  xiv.  11  from  the  gate  of  E^hraim  unto  the  corner  gate,  four  hundred 
cubits. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  353 

ally  a  conspiracy  was  formed  against  him  at  Jerusalem,  to  escape 
which  he  fled  to  Lachish.  He  was  pursued  thither  and  slain, 
but  his  body  was  brought  back  to  the  capital  and  buried  in  the 
sepulchre  of  his  fathers  {2  Kg.  xiv.  1-22,  2  Ch.  xxv). 

In  2  Ch.  xxv.  6  foil,  it  is  related  that  Amaziah,  when  making  preparations 
for  the  invasion  of  Edom,  hired  for  lOO  talents  of  silver  a  body  of  ioo,cxx> 
Israelites  to  reinforce  his  own  army  of  300,000  men  ;  but  on  the  remonstrance  of 
a  prophet,  who  urged  that  Jehovah  was  not  with  Israel,  discharged  the  troops 
he  had  engaged.  The  abrupt  dismissal  enraged  the  Israelite  soldiers,  and 
they  took  their  revenge  by  attacking  and  despoiling  several  Judsean  cities 
(strangely  described  as  lying  between  Samaria  and  Beth-horon,  but  see  xv.  8) 
on  their  homeward  march.  The  numbers  given  above  are  obviously  out  of  all 
reason  ;  but  it  is  conceivable  that  the  account  is  a  distorted  version  of  the  fact 
that  the  Israelite  king,  as  suzerain  of  Judah,  sent  troops  to  take  part  in  the 
conquest  of  Edom,  and  that  the  dismissal  of  them  by  Amaziah  was  preliminary 
to  a  formal  renunciation  of  Israelite  paramountcy.  The  disaster  which 
attended  Amaziah  in  the  subsequent  war  is  attributed  to  his  having  brought 
home  the  gods  of  Edom,  and  offered  worship  to  them. 

Jehoash  of  Israel  was  succeeded  on  the  throne  by  JERO- 
BOAM II.,  under  whom  the  progress  in  material  strength  which 
the  nation  had  made  during  the  reign  of  his  father  was  more 
than  maintained.  Unfortunately  it  is  impossible  to  follow  in 
detail  the  course  of  events  by  which  this  king  won  back  for  his 
people  the  possessions  of  which  they  had  been  despoiled.  Taking 
advantage  of  the  weakness  of  Syria,  he  not  only  secured  the 
trans-Jordanic  province  of  Gilead  (which  in  Hosea  vi.  8,  xii.  1 1  is 
regarded  as  being  as  much  a  portion  of  the  kingdom  as  any  other 
district)  but  extended  his  rule  southward  to  the  "brook  of  the 
Arabah  "  {Am.  vi.  14)  (generally  identified  with  the  Wddy  el  Ahsa^ 
flowing  into  the  lower  end  of  the  Dead  Sea).  This  implies  the 
subjugation  of  the  Moabites,  whose  raids  (as  has  been  related) 
harassed  Israel  in  the  time  of  his  father,  and  who  (if  Is.  xv., 
xvi.  1-12  has  in  view  this  time)  now  made  an  appeal  for  protection 
to  Judah,  which  seemingly  was  unsuccessful.  Northward  his 
territory  reached  to  "  the  entering  in  of  Hamath  "  (the  gorge  be- 
tween the  Lebanons).  In  2  Kg.  xiv.  28  his  conquests  are  even 
represented  as  including  Damascus  and  Hamath  itself,  but  this  is 
probably  unhistorical.  Damascus  is  spoken  of  by  Amos  (i.  3-5) 
as  an  independent  state ;  and  the  acquisition  of  the  more  remote 
Hamath  is  inherently  unlikely.  This  enlargement  of  Israel's 
dominions  to  their  former  limits  was,  no  doubt,  largely  due  to 
2  A 


354  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  ability  of  the  Israelite  sovereign ;  but  it  was  facilitated  by  the 
ill-fortune  or  incapacity  of  the  three  contemporary  Assyrian  kings 
Shalmaneser  IIL  (781-772),  Asshur-dan-il  (771-754),  and  Assliur- 
nirari  II.  (753-745).  These,  who  in  the  order  named  succeeded 
Ramman-nirari  III.,  made  no  effort  to  maintain  the  claims  which 
the  latter  had  asserted  over  the  smaller  Palestinian  states,  and 
their  indifference  gave  Jeroboam  an  opportunity  which  he  showed 
himself  capable  of  turning  to  account.  The  successes  he  obtained 
are  said  to  have  been  predicted  by  a  prophet,  Jonah,  son  of 
Amittai,  of  Gath-hepher  on  the  border  of  Zebulun  {Josh.  xix.  13), 
but  the  prophecies  which  announced  them  are  not  preserved. 

Happily  a  dii^erent  fortune  has  befallen  the  utterances  of  two 
other  prophets  who  Uved  during  this  reign.  Of  both  Amos  and 
Hosea  written  records  have  survived;  and  from  them  much  informa- 
tion is  obtainable  respecting  the  social  and  moral  condition  of  the 
Northern  Kingdom.  Amos  was  a  native  of  Judah,  but  Israel  was 
the  country  in  which  both  laboured,  and  which  both  made  the 
chief  subject  of  their  prophetic  utterances.  Amos  was  rather  the 
earlier  of  the  two ;  for  whilst  his  prophecies  seem  all  to  have  been 
comprised  within  the  lifetime  of  Jeroboam,  Hosea's,  though  begun 
in  Jeroboam's  reign,  were  continued  into  the  reigns  of  his  imme- 
diate successors.  From  the  review  of  contemporary  life  thus 
afforded,  it  is  manifest  that  it  was  to  Jehovah  that  the  religious 
service  of  the  people  was,  for  the  most  part,  directed ;  and  it  was 
in  the  permanence  of  the  bond  between  Jehovah  and  Israel  that 
the  nation  placed  its  confidence  in  time  of  adversity.  But  little 
distinction  was  popularly  drawn  between  Jehovah  and  the  local 
Baalim^  and  little  appreciation  shown  of  Jehovah's  character. 
The  golden  calves  were  still  retained  as  symbols  of  Him;  and 
the  worship  rendered  to  Him  was  formal  and  unspiritual,  and  was 
even  profaned  by  licentious  rites  imitated  from  Canaanite  usage. 
Nor  was  it  the  worship  of  Canaanite  deities  alone  that  con- 
taminated that  of  Jehovah :  the  relations  which  the  earlier 
sovereigns  of  Jehu's  dynasty  had  had  with  Assyria  had  led  to 
the  introduction  of  Assyrian  gods,  and  Amos  expressly  alludes  to 
two  of  these  as  objects  of  Israel's  adoration  {Am.  v.  26).  And 
whilst  religion,  even  when  loyal  to  Jehovah,  was  identified  with 
external  ceremonial,  the  laws  of  social  morality  were  outraged  by 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  355 

violence  and  cruelty.  The  appropriation  of  the  land  by  the  harsh 
exaction  of  debts  (Am.  ii.  6-7,  v.  11),  the  growth  of  luxury  and 
debauchery  (vi.  3-6),  the  refusal  to  heed  the  protests  raised  in  the 
name  of  religion  (ii.  12,  v.  10),  dishonesty  in  trade  (viii.  5-6), 
and  corruption  in  the  seat  of  judgment  (v.  7)  are  amongst  the 
counts  of  the  prophetic  indictment.  And  in  consequence  of  the 
perversion  of  justice  and  the  oppression  of  the  poor  that  every- 
where prevailed,  both  prophets  declared  that  vengeance  awaited 
the  guilty  nation,  which  was  to  undergo  captivity  in  a  foreign 
land.  The  prediction  of  Amos  came  to  the  ears  of  Amaziah  the 
priest  of  Bethel,  who  informed  the  king  that  the  prophet  had 
conspired  against  him,  at  the  same  time  advising  Amos,  with  con- 
temptuous kindness,  to  get  him  back  to  Judah  and  prophesy 
there — counsel  to  which  Amos  retorted  by  describing  in  explicit 
terms  the  fate  which,  in  the  overthrow  of  the  country,  would 
overtake  Amaziah  himself. 

In  the  Southern  Kingdom  the  murdered  Amaziah^  was  suc- 
ceeded by  his  son  UZZIAH  (or  AZARIAH),^  who,  since  it  is 
specially  noticed  that  he  was  chosen  by  the  people  (2  Kg.  xiv.  21), 
was  probably  not  the  natural  heir.  In  respect  of  religious 
worship,  whilst  he  receives  a  favourable  estimate  from  the 
historian  of  Kings^  he  appears  to  have  followed  traditional 
usage,  the  high  places  being  still  retained.  In  the  field  of 
external  politics,  the  only  incident  recorded  by  the  same  writer 
is  the  recovery  and  fortification  of  Elath,  where  a  renewed 
attempt  was  doubtless  made  to  develop  the  Red  Sea  trade.  ^ 
The  author  of  Chronicles^  however,  adds  a  number  of  other 
particulars  relating  both  to  the  conduct  of  foreign  wars  and 
the  provision  of  internal  defences.  He  engaged  in  hostilities 
with  the  Philistines,  in  the  course  of  which  he  dismantled  the 
fortifications  of  Gath,  Jabneh  (perhaps  the  Jabneel  of  Josh, 
XV.  II  and  the  later  Jamnid)^  and  Ashdod,  further  ensuring 
himself  against  aggression  by  erecting  fortresses  to  command 
the  enemy's  country.  His  operations  in  this  quarter  brought 
him  also  into  conflict  with  the  Arabians  of  Gurbaal  and  the 

1  See  p.  353. 

2  For  the  same  two  names  applied  to  one  individual  see  /  Ch.  vi.  24  and  36. 
'  Cf.  p.  339. 


356  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Meunim  (LXX.  MciVatoi),  who  are  probably  to  be  identified 
with  the  Minaeans  of  S.  Arabia.  He  received  presents  from 
the  Ammonites ;  and  it  is  to  this  reign  that  the  appeal  sent  by 
the  Moabites  under  stress  of  invasion,  as  described  in  Is.  xv.  xvi., 
may  reasonably  be  assigned.^  To  complete  the  defence  of  the 
realm  he  constructed  additional  fortifications  in  the  capital,  and 
repaired  the  damage  caused  by  Jehoash  of  Israel.^  The  army  was 
carefully  organised  and  equipped  (its  numbers  being  given  as 
307,500,  under  2,600  officers,  "heads  of  fathers'  houses");  whilst 
the  protection  of  the  pastoral  districts  in  the  Lowland  and 
the  Wilderness  was  secured  by  the  erection  of  watch-towers 
(2  Ch.  xxvi.  5  foil.).  There  is  no  serious  improbability,  though 
there  may  be  exaggeration  (especially  in  the  figures  of  the  army) 
in  the  description  here  given.  It  is  not  suggested  that  any  change 
was  effected  in  the  relations  of  Judah  to  Israel  which  Amaziah 
previously  had  sought,  with  so  little  success,  to  re-adjust,  and 
during  the  Hfetime  of  Jeroboam  11.  the  attempt  to  alter  them 
was  Hkely  to  meet  with  failure.  If  the  unsuccessful  appeal  of  the 
Moabites  to  a  Judcean  king,  quoted  in  Is.  xv.  xvi.,  just  referred 
to,  was  really  made  to  Uzziah,  the  rejection  of  it  agrees  with  the 
supposition  that  Judah  was  still  subservient  to  Israel,  and  that 
her  king  could  not  venture  to  protect  Moab  against  his  own 
suzerain.  Such  enterprises  as  Uzziah  is  actually  credited  with 
were  all  confined  to  the  South,  where  his  interference  with  the 
Philistine  states  only  anticipated  the  pohcy  of  Hezekiah.  And 
the  prosperity  of  the  country  which  is  related  in  Chronicles  re- 
ceives independent  corroboration  from  the  prophet  Isaiah  Csee 
c.  ii.,  especially  ver.  7,  15,  16),  whose  ministerial  call  is  dated 
from  the  last  year  of  Uzziah  (vi.  i).  But  the  prophet's  descrip- 
tion in  c.  ii.  (which  probably  in  strictness  belongs  to  the  reign  of 
Uzziah's  immediate  successor),  whilst  confirming  the  account  of 
Judah's  material  progress,  qualifies  the  impression  left  by  the 
book  of  Kings  of  the  religious  condition  of  the  people.  Isaiah 
implies  that  the  country  had  become  infected  with  the  practices 
of  idolatry  and  sorcery  (perhaps  from  intercourse  with  the  Philis- 
tines and  eastern  tribes  like  the  Ammonites,  see  ii.  6),  and  that 
arrogance,  luxury,  and  the  oppression  of  the  poor  were  rife  in 
*  See  p.  353.  ^  See  p.  352. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  357 

it  (ii.  8,  11).  Judah,  in  fact,  reproduced  many  of  the  features 
which  Amos  and  Hosea  show  to  have  prevailed  in  Israel;  and 
in  consequence  Isaiah  anticipated  for  his  countrymen  a  severe 
judgment  from  an  offended  God.  A  premonition  of  the  Divine 
anger  was  doubtless  discerned  in  the  occurrence  of  a  shock  of 
earthquake  which  took  place  in  this  reign  (Zech,  xiv.  5,  Am.  i.  i), 
and  which  possibly  suggested  the  imagery  of  Isaiah  in  ii.  19-21. 
Uzziah^  in  his  later  years  was  afflicted  with  leprosy,  and  the 
duties  of  government  were  discharged  for  him  by  his  son  Jotham, 
who  held  the  office  of  treasurer  or  steward.  ^ 

In  the  books  of  Chronicles  {2  Ch.  xxvi.  16-21)  Uzziah's  leprosy  is  attributed 
to  his  having  attempted  to  usurp  the  office  of  the  priesthood  by  burning 
incense  in  the  Temple.  Possibly  the  king's  action  (if  the  account  is  based  on 
fact)  was  rather  the  assertion  of  an  old  right  than  the  assumption  of  a  new  one. 
There  is  evidence  (as  has  been  seen)  that  in  earlier  times  the  kings  sometimes 
exercised  sacerdotal  functions,'  which  their  successors  had  come  more  and  more 
to  resign  to  the  official  priesthood. 

Uzziah's  relinquishment  of  the  reins  of  power  into  the  hands 
of  his  son  as  regent  probably  synchronised  roughly  with  the 
death  of  Jeroboam,  who  was  succeeded  by  his  son  ZECHARIAH. 
Israel  now  entered  upon  the  final  stage  of  its  history.  The  throne 
became  the  prize  of  a  succession  of  conspirators,  whose  tenure 
of  it  was,  for  the  most  part,  very  brief  (cf.  Hos,  vii.  7,  Is.  ix. 
19,  20);  and  whose  rivalries  and  misgovernment  aggravated  still 
further  the  moral  and  religious  corruption  of  the  people.  Hosea, 
part  of  whose  book  (c.  iv.-xiv.)  probably  relates  to  this  time, 
paints  a  lurid  picture  of  the  conditions  prevailing  in  the  country, 
which  he  describes  as  stained  with  the  worst  crimes,  perjury, 
debauchery,  and  bloodshed  (iv.  2,  vi.  9,  vii.  1-5).  And  the 
internal  disorders  were  accompanied  by  external  dangers,  the 
strife  of  factions  affording  opportunity  for  foreign  interference. 
During  this  period  Assyria,  under  Pul  or  Tiglath  Pileser  III.* 

1  The  Assyrian  king  Tiglath  Pileser  (744-728)  mentions  in  one  of  his 
inscriptions  that  he  received  tribute  from  Azriyalm  of  Jaudi^  and  by  some 
scholars  Uzziah  (Azariah)  of  Judah  is  supposed  to  be  meant ;  but  many 
authorities  take  /audi  to  denote  a  country  in  N.  Syria  and  deny  the  proposed 
identification  :  see  Maspero,  Passing  of  the  Empires,  p.  150,  note. 

2  For  the  office  filled  by  Jotham  cf.  Is.  xxii.  15. 
•  See  pp.  283-4. 

'In  /  Ch.  V.  26  Pul  and  Tiglath  Pileser  (there  called  Tilgath  Pilneser) 
are  represented  as  two  different  persons. 


358  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

(745-728),  the  successor  of  Asshur-nirari,  was  again  becoming 
aggressive.  Pul  seems  to  have  been  a  usurper,  who,  on  coming 
to  the  throne,  assumed  the  title  of  an  earUer  Assyrian  sovereign; 
but  he  proved  himself  a  vigorous  ruler,  and  under  him  the 
weakness  displayed  by  Assyria  in  the  course  of  the  three  previous 
reigns  was  arrested,  and  its  earlier  successes  were  renewed.  In 
his  reign  the  Assyrian  invasions  of  Palestine  ceased  to  be  isolated 
inroads,  ending,  at  most,  with  the  imposition  of  tribute,  and  had 
as  their  object  the  thorough  subjugation  of  the  country.  This 
forward  policy  awoke  the  fears  of  Egypt,  which  now,  after 
a  long  interval  of  quietude,  once  more  began  to  interest 
herself  in  the  affairs  of  Palestine.  It  was  to  one  or  other  of 
these  powers  that  the  different  parties  into  which  the  Northern 
Kingdom  now  became  split,  turned  for  support  (cf.  Hos,  vii.  1 1, 
xii.  i).  Zechariah  after  a  reign  of  only  a  few  months  was  murdered 
by  SHALLUM,  who  mounted  the  throne,  but  occupied  it  for  a 
still  shorter  period.  He  was  attacked  in  Samaria  by  MENAHEM^ 
who  had  seized  Tirzah,  and  there  slain.  His  successful  rival, 
however,  was  not  able  to  gain  possession  of  the  crown  without 
a  further  struggle,  in  the  course  of  which  he  stormed  the  town 
of  Tiphsah  (a  place  not  otherwise  known  ^),  and  committed  there 
great  barbarities.  To  render  his  position  more  secure  he  placed 
himself  under  the  protection  of  the  Assyrian  king  (cf.  Hos,  v.  13), 
paying  him  a  thousand  talents  of  silver,  which  he  exacted  from 
the  wealthiest  men  of  the  kingdom.  By  means  of  the  help  thus 
purchased,  Menahem  was  able  to  maintain  himself  in  power  for 
some  years,  and  finally  to  transmit  the  crown  to  his  son 
PEKAHIAH.  The  new  king  had  only  a  brief  reign,  and 
fell,  with  two  of  his  attendants,  Argob  and  Arieh,  by  the  sword 
of  one  of  his  oflJicers,  PEKAH^  the  son  of  Remaliah,  who  with 
a  body  of  Gileadites  attacked  him  in  his  palace  at  Samaria. 
Pekah  represented  a  faction  which  was  anti-Assyrian,  and  pursued 
a  policy  which  brought  Israel  for  the  last  time  into  conflict  with 
Judah. 

In  that  country  JOTHAM,  who  was  first  the  vice-gerent,  and 
afterwards  the  successor,  of  his  father,  is  represented  as  following 

*  In  -?  Kg.  XV.  16  for  Tiphsah  (which  cannot  be  the  city  named  in  i  Kg. 
iv.  24)  it  has  been  proposed  to  read  Tappuah  {Josh,  xii  17). 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  359 

in  the  footsteps  of  Uzziah,  remaining  faithful  to  Jehovah's 
worship,  and  strengthening  the  defences  of  the  kingdom.  The 
writer  of  Kings  ascribes  to  him  the  construction  of  the  upper 
gate  of  the  Temple-court  (probably  the  gate  of  Benjamin, 
Jer.  XX.  2) :  and  the  Chronicler  {2  Ch,  xxvii.  4  foil.)  adds  that  he 
built  much  on  the  hill  of  Ophel,  and  in  various  parts  of  the  land. 
The  latter  writer  further  states  that  he  also  engaged  in  war  with 
the  Ammonites,  and  compelled  them  to  pay  a  tribute  or  in- 
demnity in  silver  and  corn.  Before  the  close  of  his  reign,  the 
contest  with  Pekah  of  Israel,  previously  alluded  to,  became 
imminent.  This  contest  differed  in  character  from  those  in 
which  the  Northern  Kingdom  had  taken  part  for  so  long,  the 
change  noted  in  the  policy  of  Assyria  producing  a  rapprochement 
between  the  various  Palestinian  states  (previously  mutually 
hostile)  which  felt  themselves  chiefly  endangered.  Syria  and 
Israel,  in  particular,  had  been  bitter  foes  for  more  than  a  century, 
and  had  inflicted  upon  each  other  much  suffering  and  humiliation. 
But  the  fear  of  Assyria  at  last  drove  them  to  unite  (as  they  had 
once  before  done  in  defence  of  Hamath) ;  and  Pekah  the 
Israelite  king  formed  a  league  with  Rezin  (or  Rezon)  the  sovereign 
of  Damascus,  with  a  view  to  common  action.  This  confederacy 
they  desired  to  strengthen  by  the  inclusion  in  it  of  Judah,  which 
had  so  long  been  subservient  to  its  northern  neighbour;  and  they 
were  prepared  to  enforce  their  wishes  by  an  appeal  to  arms. 
Jotham,  however,  died  before  the  crisis  actually  occurred;  and 
hostilities  did  not  break  out  until  the  accession  of  his  son  AHAZ 
(or  JEHOAHAZ).! 

Ahaz,  who  succeeded  his  father  probably  at  an  early  age,^ 
proved  a  weak  and  corrupt  sovereign.  In  respect  of  religion,  he 
is  condemned  by  the  historian  in  terms  which  are  applied  to  few 
of  his  predecessors ;  and  though  he  doubtless  did  not  renounce 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  (as  the  name  of  his  son  Hezekiah,  among 
other  things,  indicates),  he  introduced  some  of  the  worst  practices 
of  the  neighbouring  nations,  not  only  making  molten  images  for 
the  Baalim,  but  causing  one^  of  his  sons  to  pass  through  the 

*  This  is  the  form  in  which  the  king's  name  appears  in  the  Ass  ian 
inscriptions.  ^  jjg  ^^s  twenty,  according  to  2  Kg,  xvi.  2,  of.  Is.  iii.  4. 

'  2  Ch.  xxviii.  3  has  his  children. 


36o  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

fire.  Upon  the  state  of  religion  and  morals  in  the  country  at 
large  light  is  thrown  by  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  and  MicalL 
The  former,  in  those  parts  of  his  writings  which  may  be  assigned 
to  the  early  part  of  this  reign  (viz.  c.  iii.-v.),  assails  the  luxury  and 
extravagance  prevalent  among  the  upper  classes  (iii.  16-23,  ^» 
11-12,  22)  and  encouraged  by  the  youthful  and  frivolous  king 
(iii.  12),  and  the  grinding  oppression  to  which  as  a  consequence 
the  poor  were  subjected  (v.  8,  23) :  whilst  Micah  bears  even 
stronger  testimony  to  the  social  iniquities  of  the  time  (ii.  2,  iii.  2-3). 
The  principal  political  event  of  the  reign  was  the  conflict  with 
Israel  and  Syria,  by  which  these  two  nations  sought  to  coerce 
Ahaz  into  joining  their  coalition  against  Assyria.  Ahaz,  encouraged 
by  the  weakness  produced  in  Israel  by  the  recent  conflicts  for  its 
throne,  defied  his  suzerain  and  refused  to  enter  the  combination ; 
and  in  consequence  Pekah  and  Rezin  proceeded  to  invade  Judah 
and  its  dependency  Edom,  with  the  view  of  dethroning  Ahaz  and 
replacing  him  by  someone  more  amenable  to  their  wishes.  The 
successor  whom  they  had  chosen  is  only  known  as  the  son  of 
Tabeel,  the  latter  name  indicating  that  he  was  of  Syrian  extrac- 
tion. The  operations  of  the  two  invading  armies  were  at  the 
outset  distinct,  Rezin  first  advancing  into  Edom,  where  he  seized 
Elath  and  restored  it  to  the  Edomites  (see  the  LXX.  of  2  Kg. 
xvi.  6)  ;  whilst  Pekah's  approach  would  naturally  be  from  the 
north,  the  two  forces  eventually  uniting  before  Jerusalem. 
According  to  2  Ch.  xxviii.  17  foil.,  the  Edomites  themselves 
also  took  part  m  the  war,  whilst  the  Philistines  attacked  the  cities 
of  the  Lowland,  and  occupied  Bechshemesh,  Aijalon,  Gederoth, 
Soco,  and  Timnah.  The  further  details  of  the  losses  sus- 
tained by  Judah  which  are  given  by  the  Chronicler  must  be 
greatly  overstated;^  but  if  Is,  c.  i.  relates  to  this  period,^  it  is 
clear  that  the  country  was  ravaged  by  fire  and  sword ;  and  Ahaz 
was  besieged  in  his  own  capital.  In  his  distress  he  determined 
to  appeal  for  help  to  Tiglath  Pileser.     In  taking  this  step,  he 

^  Pekah  is  said  to  have  slain  in  Judah  120,000  in  one  day,  and  to  have 
taken  captive  200,000,  women,  sons,  and  daughters.  The  latter,  at  the 
instigation  of  a  prophet  named  Oded,  were  restored  {2  Ch.  xxviii.  5  foil. ). 

*  It  is  doubtful  whether  Is.  i.  relates  to  the  invasion  by  Syria  and  Israel 
in  the  time  of  Ahaz  or  to  that  by  the  Assyrians  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah 
(701  B.C.);  but  the  description  of  the  prevalent  corruption  (ver.  21-23,  29) 
seems  to  suit  the  former  better  than  the  latter  (though  see  pp.  365-6). 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  361 

disregarded  the  counsel  tendered  him  by  the  prophet  Isaiah. 
Isaiah,  who,  as  has  been  said,  entered  upon  his  ministry  at  the 
close  of  Uzziah's  reign,  and  had  raised  his  voice  against  the 
increasing  vices  that  manifested  themselves  in  the  reign  of  his 
successor,  now  came  forward  to  advise  Ahaz  in  the  crisis  that 
confronted  him.  Appreciating  better  than  Ahaz  the  distracted 
condition  of  the  Northern  Kingdom,  and  recognising  that  Assyria 
would  account  for  both  Israel  and  Damascus  from  purely  self- 
regarding  motives,  he  recommended  the  king  to  trust  in  Jehovah 
and  pursue  a  policy  of  detachment  from  external  alliances, 
asserting  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  that  the  designs  of  the  two 
confederates  would  miscarry.  In  order  to  dispel  the  king's 
distrust,  he  challenged  him  to  ask  a  sign,  the  occurrence  of 
which  might  reassure  him :  and  on  his  declining,  he  himself 
offered  as  a  sign^  a  prediction  of  the  dispersal  of  the  danger,  then 
threatening,  within  a  period  of  two  or  three  years.  Before  a 
child,  about  to  be  born  and  to  be  named  by  his  mother 
Immanuel^  would  begin  to  show  tokens  of  intelligence,  the  priva- 
tions which  the  land  was  undergoing  would  come  to  an  end,  and 
the  two  hostile  countries  would  be  kingless.  But  the  prophet 
realised  that  Ahaz  had  decided  to  appeal  to  Assyria ;  and  accord- 
ingly he  added  that  evil  was  in  store  for  Judah  from  the  very 
source  from  which  deliverance  was  anticipated  {Is.  c.  vii.).  These 
two  predictions  (i)  that  within  so  brief  a  period  as  the  infancy  of 
a  child  born  at  the  time  of  the  prophet's  declaration  Samaria 
and  Damascus  would  be  the  spoil  of  Assyria,  and  (2)  that 
Judah's  request  for  Assyria's  intervention  would  lead  to  evils 
exceeding  in  mischief  those  sustained  from  Israel  and  Syria,  were 
renewed  on  other  occasions  and  in  other  terms  {Is,  viii.  i-x.  4). 
But  the  prophet's  assurances  were  unheeded;  and  the  policy 
upon  which  Ahaz  had  resolved  he  carried  out.  A  present  of 
treasure  was  sent  to  Assyria  to  procure  support ;  and  the  gift  was 
accepted  as  tribute.  Tiglath  Pileser  then  proceeded  to  attack 
both  Israel  and  Syria,  In  734  he  invaded  the  former,  and  made 
himself  master  of  Gilead,  Naphtali,^  and  the  district  of  Galilee. 

1  See  p.  433,  note. 

'  The/anoah  of  2  Kg.  xv.  29  is  not  the  Janoah  oi  Josh.  xvi.  6  (which  was 
on  the  border  of  Ephraim)  but  a  place  in  Naphtali. 


362  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

The  Ass3Tians,  who  have  been  sometimes  styled,  rather  un- 
deservedly, the  Romans  of  the  East,  were  more  concerned  to 
secure  their  conquests  than  to  convert  them  into  contented 
dependencies,  and  with  this  end  in  view  adopted  the  barbarous, 
if  efifective,  expedient  of  deporting  a  subjugated  population  to  a 
distant  region,  and  replacing  it  by  immigrants  drawn  from  various 
quarters.  This  system  was  now  applied  to  the  conquered  districts 
of  Israel,  whose  inhabitants  were  carried  away  into  Assyria.^  In 
the  year  following  this  success,  Tiglath  Pileser  directed  his  forces 
against  Damascus,  which  he  captured  in  732,  its  people  being 
deported  to  Kir, 2  and  its  king  Rezin  slain.  At  Damascus  Ahaz 
appeared  before  his  suzerain,  and  there  was  attracted  by  the  altar 
used  by  the  Assyrian  king.  The  fashion  of  worship  practised  by 
so  powerful  a  sovereign  doubtless  impressed  him  as  being  itself 
potent  and  effectual ;  and  he  therefore  sent  a  copy  of  the  altar 
to  Urijah  the  priest  at  Jerusalem,  with  instructions  to  build  one 
like  it.  On  his  return  he  ordered  it  to  be  used  regularly  for 
oflfering  sacrifice,^  the  brazen  altar  erected  by  Solomon  being 
retained  only  for  purposes  of  divination.  He  made  other  altera- 
tions in  the  arrangements  of  the  Temple,  including  the  removal 
of  the  Molten  Sea  from  off  the  twelve  brazen  oxen  {i  Kg.  vii.  25), 
and  its  replacement  upon  a  pavement  of  stone.  The  brazen 
oxen  and  similar  works  of  art  were  probably  concealed,  lest  they 
should  excite  Assyrian  cupidity.* 

Pekah  did  not  long  survive  his  confederate  Rezin.  He  fell  a 
victim  to  a  conspirator  named  HOSHEA,  who  was  allowed  by 
the  Assyrians  to  raise  himself  to  the  throne  on  condition  of  pay- 
ing tribute  {2  Kg.  xvii.  3).     Tiglath  Pileser  himself  died  in  728, 

*  C£  /  Ch.  V.  26.  Tiglath  Pileser  in  his  inscriptions  (Schrader,  i.  248) 
exaggeratedly  states  that  he  deported  the  whole  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
"land  Beth  Omri."  Some  of  the  depopulated  districts  E.  of  the  Jordan  were 
eventually  appropriated  by  the  neighbouring  Ammonites  {see/er.  xlix.  i). 

'  The  LXX.  (B),  however,  omits  /<?  AltV,  and  the  fact  that  Kir  was  the 
original  home  of  the  Arameans  (Am.  ix.  7)  makes  their  deportation  thither 
rather  strange,  though  it  is  predicted  by  Amos  (i.  5). 

'  The  Chronicler  strangely  describes  Ahaz  as  sacrificing  to  the  gods  of 
Damascus.  The  allusion  is  probably  to  the  king's  use  of  the  altar  seen  at 
Damascus,  which  must,  under  the  circumstances,  have  been  Assyrian  and 
not  Syrian. 

*  They  are  mentioned  amongst  the  spoils  taken  to  Babylon  subsequently 
{Jer.  xxvii.  19-22,  lii.  20). 


I 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  363 

and  was  succeeded  by  Shalmaneser  IV.  (727-723).  The  change 
of  sovereign  finally  tempted  Hoshea  to  defy  the  Assyrian  power 
and  to  intrigue  with  Egypt  for  support.  The  latter  country  was 
now  under  the  rule  of  So  or  Sabako,^  an  Ethiopian,  and  the  first 
sovereign  of  the  25th  dynasty.  Hoshea's  hope  of  Egyptian 
aid,  however,  proved  delusive;  and  in  724  Shalmaneser  attacked 
and  besieged  Samaria.  The  city  offered  a  stubborn  defence; 
and  Shalmaneser  died  before  it  surrendered.  He  was  succeeded 
by  Sargon  ;2  and  by  him  the  Israelite  capital  was  eventually  taken 
in  722.  Its  capture  was  followed  by  the  usual  deportation 
of  the  inhabitants.  More  than  27,000  were  conveyed  to 
different  places  in  the  Assyrian  empire,  among  the  localities  to 
which  they  were  removed  being  Halah,^  Habor,^  Gozan,^  and  the 
cities  of  Media.  The  number  withdrawn  from  the  country  does 
not  appear  relatively  large;  and  a  considerable  population  must 
have  been  left  in  it.  Nevertheless  in  order  to  occupy  the  room 
of  the  exiled  Israelites,  settlers  were  introduced  from  Babylon, 
Cutha,^  Avva,^  Hamath,  and  Sepharvaim.^  It  is  natural  to  con- 
clude that  these  were  brought  in  by  Sargon  himself,  who  in  one 
of  his  inscriptions  actually  names  Babylon  as  a  city  whose  inhabi- 
tants he  had  transported  into  "the  land  of  the  Hittites."^  But 
in  another  of  the  same  king's  inscriptions,^^  the  peoples  stated  to 
have  been  settled  by  him  in  Samaria  are  given  otherwise  than  in 
2  Kg.  xvii.  24;  so  that  the  cities  named  above  may  be  those 
from  which  emigrants  were  drawn  at  a  later  time  by  Esarhaddon, 
one  of  Sargon's  successors  (see  Ez.  iv.  2).  Ultimately  a  third 
colonisation  took  place  under  Esarhaddon's  heir,  Asshurbanipal, 
who  is  the  O snapper  of  Ez.  iv.  10. 

The  kingdom  of  the  Ten  Tribes  was  brought  to  an  end  after 

^  The  identity  of  the  So  of  2  Kg,  xvii.  4  with  the  Pharaoh  Sabako  is 
disputed  by  many  scholars,  who  regard  the  former  as  the  king  of  a  small 
district  E.  of  the  Delta  ;  see  Maspero,  Passing  of  the  Etnpires^  p.  213. 

^  In  2  Kg.  xvii.  5-6  Shalmaneser  and  Sargon  are  not  distinguished. 

^  The  site  is  not  precisely  known. 

*  i.e.  the  river  Chaboras. 

'  The  district  near  the  Habor. 

•  A  city  near  Babylon,  the  chief  seat  of  the  worship  of  the  god  Nergal. 
'  Unknown. 

'  i.e.  the  two  Sippars,  some  twenty-five  miles  N.  of  Babylon. 

'  See  Schrader,  Cuneiform  Inscriptions^  i.  p.  268.  ^"  Id.^  i.  p.  269. 


364  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

a  separate  existence  of  not  much  more  than  200  years.  That  its 
downfall  preceded  that  of  the  inferior  state  of  Judah  was  really 
due  to  the  very  causes  which  gave  to  it  its  greater  importance. 
Its  superiority  to  the  Southern  Kingdom  was  the  consequence 
of  its  advantages  in  respect  not  only  of  extent  and  fertility,  but 
of  trading  facilities,  inasmuch  as  it  was  traversed  by  the  principal 
commercial  routes  leading  from  Egypt  to  Phoenicia  and  the 
Euphrates.  But  its  wealth  and  productiveness  excited  cupidity, 
whilst  its  situation  upon  the  great  arteries  of  traffic  which  swelled 
its  prosperity,  rendered  it  accessible  to  invasion,  as  is  shown  by 
the  repeated  sieges  sustained  by  its  capital  Samaria.  Judah,  on 
the  other  hand,  though  smaller  and  weaker,  was  much  less 
vulnerable.  It  lay  off  the  main  line  of  march  pursued  by  the 
armies  of  the  greater  Eastern  powers;  and  when  penetrated, 
offered  little  to  repay  the  cost  of  acquisition.  Judah's  isolation 
and  comparative  poverty  were  thus  sources  of  strength,  and 
enabled  it  to  outlast  (as  will  be  seen)  by  nearly  150  years  its  more 
favoured  rival. 

Of  the  condition  and  experiences  of  the  conquered  territory 
(henceforward  known  as  the  province  of  Samaria)  only  a  few 
particulars  occur.  In  2  Kg.  xvii.  25  the  colonists  are  related 
to  have  suffered  from  the  depredations  of  lions,  which  they 
attributed  to  their  ignorance  of  the  right  way  of  worshipping 
Jehovah,  the  God  of  the  land  ;  whereupon  an  Israelite  priest  was 
obtained  to  instruct  them,  with  the  result  that  there  ensued  a 
fusion  of  the  service  of  Jehovah  with  that  of  the  deities  of  the 
various  nationalities  represented  in  the  immigrant  population 
(ver.  33,  41).  An  inscription  of  Sargon  names  Samaria  among 
a  number  of  cities  which  in  720  B.C.  revolted  at  the  instigation 
of  Jahubidi  (or  Ilubidi),  king  of  Hamath;  but  the  insurrection 
was  quelled  by  the  defeat  and  death  of  its  author.^  When  at 
a  later  time  the  power  of  Assyria  declined,  its  influence  over  the 
province  of  Samaria  grew  less,  and,  as  will  be  seen,  some  of  the 
Judaean  kings  extended  their  authority  over  part  of  it.  Its 
further  history,  so  far  as  it  is  important,  then  comes  under  notice 
in  connection  with  that  of  Judah,  and  does  not  call  for  inde- 
pendent treatment. 

*  Schrader,  op.  cit,^  ii.  p.  8. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  365 

On  the  throne  of  Judah  Ahaz  was  succeeded  by  his  son 
HEZEKIAH,  who  must  have  been  quite  young  when  he  began 
to  reign. 1  In  character,  he  was  a  great  contrast  to  his  father. 
He  initiated  an  active  religious  reform  ;  and  was  the  first  king  to 
realise  that  the  chief  seats  of  the  immorality  which  in  previous 
reigns  had  sometimes  defiled  the  worship  of  Jehovah  were  the 
"  high  places."  He  accordingly  proceeded  to  abolish  them  as 
religious  sanctuaries  (2  Kg.  xviii.  4,  xxi.  3),  and  also  destroyed 
such  symbols  as  the  Asherim  and  the  pillars.  He  even 
demolished  the  brazen  serpent  reputed  to  have  been  made  by 
Moses  (which  was  designated  by  the  name  Nehushian,  "  a  piece 
of  brass"),  because  it  had  hitherto  been  the  practice  to  offer 
incense  to  it.  The  historian  of  the  books  of  Kings,  who,  in 
commending  the  best  of  the  earlier  sovereigns,  takes  exception 
to  their  retention  of  the  "  high  places,"  declares,  in  consequence 
of  this  zeal  of  Hezekiah  for  the  purity  of  Jehovah's  service,  that 
there  were  none  like  him  among  all  the  kings  of  Judah,  either 
before  or  after.  Hezekiah  must  have  been  greatly  aided  in  his 
work  of  reform  by  the  prophets  Isaiah  and  Micah,  who,  as  has 
been  seen,  had  attacked  the  corruption  that  spread  over  the  land 
during  the  previous  reign  in  language  of  stern  warning,  and 
whose  ministry  continued  into  this  reign  {oi.  Jer.  xxvi.  17-19). 
But  the  progress  of  reformation  was  naturally  slow,  and  the 
writings  of  the  first-named  prophet  indicate  that,  even  late  in 
Hezekiah's  reign,  there  was  much  that  was  defective  not  only  in 
the  moral  life  of  the  community,  but  even  in  the  usages  of 
religion.  The  prophet's  invectives  point  to  the  continued 
prevalence  of  oppression  and  selfish  luxury  (xxx.  12,  xxxii.  9); 
whilst  graven  and  molten  images  were  still  objects  of  the  people's 
adoration  (xxx.  22,  xxxi.  7). 

Some  scholars  have  discredited  the  statement  of  2  Kings  xviii.  4  that  the 
abolition  of  the  "high  places"  was  undertaken  early  in  Hezekiah's  reign, 
holding  that  the  reformation  was  only  a  consequence  of  the  disasters  that 
at  a  much  later  period  befell  the  provincial  sanctuaries  in  the  course  of  the 
Assyrian  invasion  of  701  as  contrasted  with  the  deliverance  experienced  by 

^  In  2  Kg.  xviii.  2  Hezekiah  is  represented  as  being  twenty-five  at  his 
accession  ;  but  as  Ahaz,  according  to  2  Kg.  xvi.  2,  was  twenty  when  he  began 
to  reign,  and  reigned  sixteen  years,  he  would  be  only  thirty-six  at  his  death, 
and  could  scarcely  leave  a  son  aged  twenty-five.  Hezekiah's  alleged  age  is 
still  more  impossible  if  Ahaz  reigned  less  than  sixteen  years  (see  p.  321). 


366  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Jerusalem.  This  view  is  contradicted  by  xviiL  22,  which  then  has  to  be 
rejected  as  an  interpolation.  At  the  same  time  the  evidence  of  a  contem- 
porary prophet  (as  exhibited  above)  shows  that,  prior  to  the  invasion  referred 
to,  even  idol  worship  still  prevailed,  whilst  2  Kg.  xxiii.  13  implies  that  the 
"high  places"  built  by  Solomon  for  the  deities  worshipped  by  his  foreign 
wives  were  not  destroyed  till  the  reign  of  Josiah ;  ^  so  that  the  reformation, 
if  initiated  at  the  beginning  of  Hezekiah's  reign,  cannot  have  been  very 
thorough. 

The  Chronicler  {2  Ch.  xxix.-xxxi.)  largely  amplifies  the  account  of  2  Kings. 
He  states  that  Hezekiah  in  the  first  month  of  the  first  year  of  his  rule  opened 
and  repaired  the  Temple,  and  assembling  the  priests  and  Levites  bade  them 
sanctify  it,  and  then  offered  a  solemn  sacrifice  to  make  atonement  for  all 
Israel,  which  was  followed  by  thank-offerings.  Subsequently  a  Passover 
was  held  in  the  second  month  (because  preparations  were  not  completed  by 
the  first),  to  which  the  surviving  members  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  were 
summoned,  it  being  assumed  that  Samaria  by  that  time  had  fallen  (although 
2  Kings  places  that  event  in  Hezekiah's  sixth  year).  Next,  the  destruction 
of  all  the  pillars,  Asherim^  and  high  places  was  undertaken,  not  only  in 
Judah  and  Benjamin,  but  in  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  likewise ;  and  finally 
the  services  of  the  Temple  and  the  dues  of  the  priesthood  were  organised 
in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the  Mosaic  law.  These  details  are 
obviously  elaborated  in  the  belief  that  the  legislation  of  the  entire  Pentateuch 
was  in  existence  at  this  time,  and  that  so  reUgious  a  king  as  Hezekiah  would 
naturally  enforce  it. 

At  the  outset  of  his  reign  Hezekiah  probably  continued  to  pay 
the  tribute  to  Assyria  which  Ahaz  had  engaged  to  render,  and 
which  the  overthrow  of  Samaria  in  722,  if  nothing  else,  showed 
could  not  with  safety  be  at  the  time  refused.  If  the  obscure 
oracle  in  Is.  xiv.  28-32,  directed  against  Philistia,  refers  to  a 
change  of  sovereign  on  the  throne  of  Assyria,  as  was  the  case 
in  722,  it  would  appear  that  the  Jewish  king  received  overtures 
from  the  Phihstines  for  a  concerted  movement  against  the 
Assyrians,  and  that  Isaiah  opposed  his  participation  in  it.  It 
is  even  possible  that  Hezekiah  not  only  followed  the  prophet's 
counsel,  but  even  took  up  arms  in  the  capacity  of  an  Assyrian 
vassal :  at  any  rate  he  appears  to  have  engaged  in  war  with  his 
neighbours  on  the  south-west,  and  was  so  far  successful  that  he 
pushed  his  advance  even  to  Gaza.  But  the  continuance  of 
Hezekiah's  fidelity  to  Assyria  was  conditioned  solely  by  the 
prospect  of  success  in  the  struggle  that  would  follow  the  re- 
nunciation of  allegiance;  and  the  knowledge  he  gained  in  this 
war  may  have  suggested  to  him  the  expediency  of  a  change  of 

^  The  altars  on  the  roof  of  the  upper  chamber  of  Ahaz,  destroyed  by 
Josiah  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  12),  may  have  been  erected  by  Manasseh ;  the  LXX.,  for 
which  the  kings  of  Judah  had  made  (which  must  be  taken  to  refer  to  Ahaz  as 
well  as  Manasseh)  has  &  iiroirjcev  ^acrikevs  ^lov8a. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  367 

attitude.  Some  of  the  Philistine  cities  were  divided,  as  Samaria 
had  been,  between  philo- Assyrian  and  anti-Assyrian  factions ;  and 
the  relative  strength  of  the  two  parties  was  an  important  factor 
in  determining  the  policy  of  neighbouring  states. 

As  has  been  seen,  it  was  towards  Egypt  that  the  enemies  of 
Assyria  generally  turned  for  help,  and  in  720  Hanno  of  Gaza 
was  actively  intriguing  with  So  (Sabako),  the  Egyptian  Pharaoh. 
The  latter  took  the  field  against  the  Assyrian  king,  but  the  hopes 
of  the  intriguers  were  disappointed  by  his  defeat  at  Raphia ;  and 
Hanno  himself  was  captured.  In  711,  however,  the  revolt  was 
renewed  by  Azuri,  the  king  of  Ashdod ;  who  was,  in  consequence, 
deposed  by  Sargon,  who  appointed  Achimit,  his  brother,  to  be 
king  in  his  stead.  But  the  people  rose  against  him,  and  placed 
a  certain  Jaman  on  the  throne;  whereupon  Sargon  despatched 
his  Tartan,  or  commander-in-chief,  against  Ashdod,  which  was 
captured  and  its  inhabitants  deported.  The  disaster  had  been 
anticipated  by  the  prophet  Isaiah,  who  foresaw  only  too  clearly 
the  futihty  of  any  reliance  upon  the  promises  of  Egypt  (see  Is. 
c.  XX.),  and  whose  policy  it  was  to  keep  Judah  from  defying  the 
power  of  Assyria,  and  to  bring  about  internal  reforms.  But  in 
spite  of  Isaiah's  counsel,  Hezekiah  seems  to  have  excited  the 
suspicion  of  Sargon,  who,  in  one  of  his  inscriptions,  mentions 
Judah  as  being  among  "  the  plotters  of  sedition,"  who,  in  order 
to  stir  up  rebellion,  '*  had  brought  gifts  of  friendship  to 
Pharaoh.''^  It  is  possible,  indeed,  that  the  overthrow  of  Ashdod 
was  accompanied  by  an  inroad  into  Judah,  for  the  Assyrian  king 
in  another  inscription  claims  to  have  subdued  Judah;  but  the 
occasion  referred  to  is  obscure. 

In  705  Sargon  died  (seemingly  by  violence),  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Sennacherib.  The  accession  of  a  new  sovereign 
offered  once  more  an  opportunity  to  the  vassals  and  tributaries 
of  Assyria  to  renew  their  efforts  to  regain  their  independence ; 
and  the  first  to  move  was  the  king  of  Babylon,  Merodach 
Baladan.  This  prince,  who  was  not  a  native  Babylonian,^  had 
in   721,   by  the  aid  of  the  Elamites,  made  himself  master  of 

^  Schrader,  C.  I. ,  ii.  p.  lOO. 

*  He  was  by  origin  a  Chaldean,  Chaldea  being  the  district  lying  S.E.  of 
Babylon,  at  the  head  of  the  Persian  Gulf.  In  2  Kg,  xx.  12  he  is  erroneously 
named  Berodach  Baladan, 


368  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Babylon;  but  had  been  compelled  by  Sargon  to  abandon  it 
in  710.  In  704-3,  however,  shortly  after  Sennacherib's  acces- 
sion, he  emerged  from  his  retirement  and  re-entered  Babylon, 
and  prepared  for  another  struggle  against  the  Assyrian  oppressors. 
Hezekiah,  shortly  before  this  time,  had  fallen  sick  of  the  plague, 
and  his  life  was  despaired  of;  but  in  answer  to  his  earnest 
prayer,  he  was  providentially  restored  to  health,  the  prophet 
Isaiah  directing  the  remedy  to  be  employed  and  foretelling  his 
recovery  from  the  malady.  The  prediction,  it  is  said,  was 
confirmed  by  a  sign,  consisting  in  the  return  of  the  sun's  shadow, 
cast  upon  the  dial  of  Ahaz,  through  ten  steps  or  degrees.  News 
of  this  reached  Merodach  Baladan,  and  he  took  advantage  of 
the  occasion  to  send  an  embassy,  with  letters  and  a  present, 
to  Jerusalem,  ostensibly  to  congratulate  Hezekiah,  but,  no  doubt, 
in  reality  to  concert  with  him  a  movement  against  Assyria.  The 
Jewish  king  displayed  to  the  envoys  all  his  treasures ;  but  Isaiah, 
who  realised  much  better  than  many  of  his  contemporaries  the 
formidable  strength  of  Assyria,  censured  Hezekiah  for  his 
conduct,  and  is  related  to  have  declared  that  to  Babylon  both 
his  treasure  and  his  descendants  should  be  eventually  carried 
away.  Isaiah's  estimate  of  the  situation  was  fully  justified  by 
events.  The  Babylonian  king  met  with  defeat  shortly  after- 
wards and  was  driven  from  his  capital;  his  palace  was  plundered; 
and  a  large  number  of  cities  (Erech,  Niffer,  Cutha,  etc.)  which 
supported  him  were  captured,  and  their  inhabitants  deported.  ^ 

In  the  O.T.  the  narrative  of  Hezekiah's  illness  and  the  embassy  from 
Babylon  are  placed  at  the  close  of  his  history  {2  Kg.  c.  xx.,  /r.  c  xxxviiL, 

*  It  seems  probable  that  Is.  xxi.  i-io  has  this  assault  upon  Babylon  (b.c.  704) 
in  view.  The  section  is  often  regarded  as  referring  to  the  attack  upon  Babylon 
by  Cyrus  in  538  (chiefly  in  consequence  of  the  mention  of  Media  (ver.  2)  as 
among  the  assailants,  and  the  allusion  to  the  tribulation  of  Israel  (ver.  10) ), 
and  its  Isaianic  authorship  is  accordingly  denied.  But  tlie  sympathy  displayed 
for  Babylon  contrasts  strikingly  with  the  exultant  tone  of  the  exilic  sections 
xl.-lxvi,  and  xiii.  i-xiv.  23 ;  whilst  the  description  of  the  besieger  as  the 
treacherous  dealer  (ver.  2)  is  not  only  actually  applied  to  the  Assyrians  in 
xxxiii.  I,  but  is  quite  inapplicable  to  Cyrus.  The  address  to  Elam  and  Media 
(ver.  2)  comes  from  the  Assyrian  king  assaulting  Babylon,  among  whose  vassals 
both  countries  were  included,  whilst  in  ver.  10  the  tribulation  of  Israel  is 
probably  prospective  and  not  present  (see  W.  E.  Barnes  mJ.T.S.  for  July, 
1900,  who,  however,  thinks  that  the  siege  depicted  is  that  which  Babylon 
sustained  in  710,  and  regards  ver.  1-5  as  referring  to  an  imminent  attack  upon 
Jerusalem), 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  369 

xxxix. ) :  but  that  they  really  took  place  before  Hezekiah  was  openly  involved 
in  war  with  Sennacherib  and  compelled  to  sacrifice  his  treasures  (see  below, 
and  2  Kg.  xviii.  15)  is  clear  from  the  fact  that  the  Jewish  king  was  still  in 
possession  of  such  treasures. 

The  prediction  of  Isaiah  that  the  descendants  of  Hezekiah  should  be 
carried  captive  to  Babylon  has  been  suspected  by  some  scholars  to  be  a  vati- 
cinium  post  eventum.  The  fact  that  Babylon,  rather  than  Nineveh  or 
Assyria,  is  named  is  not  fatally  inconsistent  with  the  statement  proceeding 
from  Isaiah,  for  Babylon  was  at  this  time  generally  subject  to  the  kings 
of  Assyria,  one  of  whom,  in  2  Kg.  xvii.  24,  is  represented  as  establishing 
in  N.  Israel  settlers  drawn  from  thence ;  cf.  also  Mic.  iv.  10.  But  Isaiah 
elsewhere  in  his  prophecies,  in  predicting  that  Jerusalem  will  be  delivered 
from  the  assault  of  Sennacherib,  shows  no  consciousness  of  a  disaster 
destined  to  overtake  it  at  a  more  remote  period  (such  as  is  implied  in  xxxix. 
6,  7),  and  seems  to  regard  its  salvation  as  permanently  assured  (see  Is.  xxxiii. 
20-22). 

The  mission  of   Merodach   Baladan  was   not   the   only  one 

received  by  Hezekiah  about  this  period.     He  was   visited  by 

certain  Ethiopian  envoys,  sent  presumably  at  the  direction,  or 

with  the  consent,  of  the  Egyptian  king,  to  arrange  plans  for 

concerted  action  against  Assyria.     Their  proposals,   like  those 

brought  by  the  Babylonian  ambassadors,  met  with  disapproval 

from  the  prophet  Isaiah,  who  relied  for  the  safety  of  his  country 

less  upon  political  combinations  than  upon  the  protection  of 

Jehovah  {Is.  xviii.).     But  from  the  king  it  is  probable  that  they 

obtained  much  more  favourable  consideration;  and  their  offers 

of  support  doubtless  pre-disposed  him  to  adopt  a  bolder  line 

of  conduct  towards  Assyria  as  soon  as  a  promising  opportunity 

presented  itself.     This  came  in  701  when  a  general  revolt  broke 

out  among  the  cities  of  Phoenicia  and  Palestine,  instigated  by 

Egypt,   where    So    (Shabako)    had    now    been    succeeded    by 

Shabatak.     The  anti-Assyrian  party  in  the  Philistine  cities  was 

at  this  time  paramount ;  and  in  Ashkelon  and  Ekron  the  kings 

Sarludari  and    Padi,   who    supported   Assyrian    interests,    were 

dethroned.     A  faction  at  Jerusalem,  led  perhaps  by  Hezekiah's 

treasurer  Shebna  (cf.  Is.  xxii.    15  foil.),  had  long  opposed  the 

policy  of  inactivity  and  isolation  advocated  by  Isaiah,  and  had 

endeavoured  to  promote  an  alliance  with  Egypt  (cf.  Is.  xxx.   2 

foil.) ;  and  Hezekiah  yielding  himself  to  it,   now  threw  off  his 

vassalage  and  refused  tribute  (2  Kg.  xviii.  7).     In  view  of  the 

attack  which  he  knew  would  follow,  he  had  strengthened  the 

fortifications    of   Jerusalem   (2    Ch.   xxxii.    5)   and  secured   its 

2   B 


370  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

water-supply  (2  Kg,  xx.  20,  2  Ch.  xxxii.  30,  Is.  xxii.  9-11),^ 
at  the  same  time  stopping  the  fountains  that  were  without  the 
city  to  prevent  the  enemy  from  using  them  {2  Ch.  xxxii.  3). 
As  soon  as  he  had  committed  himself  to  war  by  renouncing  the 
Assyrian  suzerainty,  he  proceeded  to  co-operate  with  the  anti- 
Assyrian  party  in  Philistia;  and  the  Ekronites  placed  in  his 
hands  the  dethroned  Padi.  Sennacherib,  however,  advanced 
rapidly  towards  the  disaffected  states,  his  first  efforts  being 
directed  against  Phoenicia,  where  Elulai,  king  of  Tyre  and  Zidon, 
had  been  negotiating  with  Shabatak.  The  capture  of  his 
principal  cities  drove  Elulai  to  seek  refuge  in  Cyprus ;  and  the 
independent  towns  of  Arvad  and  Gebal  thereupon  submitted, 
and  rendered  tribute.  Sennacherib  then  marched  into  PhiUstia, 
and  obtained  there  the  submission  of  Ashdod,  together  with  that 
of  the  more  distant  countries  of  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon. 
But  Ashkelon  and  Ekron  resisted,  and  were  accordingly 
attacked  and  besieged.  Ashkelon  was  the  first  to  fall,  Zidka, 
who  had  been  made  king  in  place  of  Sarludari,  being  captured 
and  his  predecessor  restored.  To  relieve  the  siege  of  Ekron 
a  large  force  advanced  under  the  command  of  Tirhakah,  at 
this  time  presumably  the  general,  though  subsequently  the  suc- 
cessor, of  Shabatak ;  but  at  Eltekeh  ^  l^Altaku)  it  was  met  and 
defeated  by  Sennacherib,  who  then  in  succession  captured 
Timnath  and  Ekron.  Judah  was  now  invaded;  forty-six  towns 
were  taken  and  more  than  200,000  persons  (if  the  figures  given 
in  the  inscriptions  may  be  trusted)  were  deported,  together  with  a 
large  quantity  of  cattle.  ^  Hezekiah  was  besieged  in  Jerusalem ; 
and  was  compelled  to  deliver  up  the  Ekronite  king  Padi,  as  well 
as  his  own  daughters  and  other  women,  and  to  submit  to  the 
payment  of  a  large  fine  (30  talents  of  gold  and  300  talents  of 
silver)  in  addition  to  the  former  annual  tribute.  The  failure 
of  Egypt  at  Eltekeh  to  resist  the  Assyrian  forces,  and  the 
consequent  humiliation  thus  inflicted  on  Judah,  justified  the 
previous    warnings    of    Isaiah ;    whilst   his    political    opponent 

^  The  waters  of  Gihon  {2  Ch.  xxxii.  30)  which  Hezekiah  stopped  were 
those  of  the  Virgin's  fountain  in  the  Kidron  valley.  There  was  probably  at 
first  a  surface  conduit,  carrying  the  water  to  the  pool  of  Siloam  (cf.  Is.  viii.  6) ; 
but  Hezekiah  replaced  this  by  a  subterranean  tunnel. 

^  S&Q /osh.  xix.  44.  '  Schrader,  C.  /.,  i.  pp.  284-6. 


ISRAEL   AND   JUDAH  371 

Shebna  was  proportionally  discredited,  and  was  now  removed 
from  his  office  (which  was  filled  by  Eliakim)  and  given  the 
subordinate  post  of  scribe  (see  Is.  xxii.  15  compared  with 
xxxvii.  2). 

This  surrender  was  construed  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  Jewish 
capital  as  securing  the  safety  of  the  city  (cf.  Jos.  Anf.  x.  i,  i). 
But  Sennacherib,  on  further  consideration,  seems  to  have  con- 
cluded that  it  was  inexpedient  to  leave  so  strong  a  fortress  in  the 
hands  of  an  ill-disposed  population  when  he  himself  was  preparing 
to  advance  towards  Egypt.  For  this,  or  some  other  reason,  he 
disregarded  the  implied  compact  with  Hezekiah  (cf.  Is.  xxxiii.  8), 
and  whilst  engaged  in  attacking  Lachish,  he  sent  three  of  his 
officers,  the  Tartan,  the  Rabsaris,  and  the  Rabshakeh,i  to  demand 
the  capitulation  of  Jerusalem,  and  to  hold  out  to  the  citizens  the 
prospect  of  removal  to  another  land  as  good  as  their  own.  Heze- 
kiah in  great  despondency  communicated  the  summons  to  Isaiah, 
who  though  he  had  protested  against  breaking  with  Assyria,  neither 
deserted  his  country  in  the  time  of  her  need  nor  despaired  of  her 
eventual  deliverance.  Replying  to  the  king,  he  encouraged  him 
in  the  name  of  Jehovah  to  defy  his  enemy  and  to  refuse  the 
demand  made  of  him.  The  messengers,  who  bore  Hezekiah's 
refusal  to  Sennacherib,  found  the  Assyrian  king  at  Libnah  (whither 
he  had  moved  from  Lachish),  who  thereupon  sent  by  letter  a 
second  summons  for  the  surrender  of  Jerusalem.  Hezekiah,  on 
receiving  the  letter,  took  it  into  the  Temple  and  spread  it  before 
Jehovah,  with  a  prayer  for  the  safety  of  himself  and  his  people. 
An  answer  came  through  Isaiah,  who  sent  to  the  king  a  message 
in  which  he  declared  that  Sennacherib  (who  had  boasted  in  his 
letter  of  his  own  and  his  father's  conquests)  was  only  an  instru- 
ment in  Jehovah's  hand ;  that  his  career  was  now  to  be  checked ; 
and  that  his  threats  against  Jerusalem  would  come  to  naught. 
The  prediction  was  strikingly  fulfilled.  The  Assyrians,  advancing 
towards  Pelusium,  there  met  with  a  sudden  and  over\vhelming 
disaster,  the  precise  nature  of  which  can  only  be  conjectured. 
Sennacherib  returned  to  Assyria,  and  survived  the  failure  of  his 

^  The  names  Tarian,  Rabsaris^  and  Rabshakeh  are,  more  or  less  certainly, 
titles  of  military  officers;  the  first  meaning  commander-in-chiefs  the  last  chief 
of  the  captains s  and  the  second  probably  chief  of  the  princes. 


372  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

plans  some  twenty  years ;  but  he  never  renewed  his  attack  upon 
Jerusalem,  and  was  ultimately  assassinated  in  68 1  by  two  of  his 
sons  Adrammelech  and  Sharezer,  ^  whilst  worshipping  in  the  temple 
of  the  god  Nisroch. 

The  above  account  is  based  on  a  combination  of  the  O.T.  narrative, 
substantially  as  it  stands,  with  that  given  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions,  it 
being  assumed  that  2  Kg.  xviii.  13-16  is  the  Hebrew  version  of  the  capture  of 
the  forty-six  Judaean  towns  and  the  imposition  on  Hezekiah  of  the  additional 
fine  mentioned  by  Sennacherib,  and  that  xviii.  17-xix.  37  describes  events 
which  happened  subsequently  to  those  narrated  by  the  Assyrian  king.  The 
two  accounts,  however,  which  almost  certainly  supplement  one  another,  may 
be  united  in  various  ways.  It  is  possible  that  the  Hebrew  account  from 
xviii.  17  to  xix.  34  (=  Is.  xxxvi.  2-xxxvii.  35)  consists  of  a  double  representa- 
tion of  a  single  demand  for  the  surrender  of  Jerusalem,  the  first,  contained  in 
xviii.  17-xix.  7  {—Is.  xxxvi.  2-xxxvii.  7)  describing  the  summons  as  having 
been  conveyed  from  Lachish  by  the  Rabshakeh  ayid  his  colldogueSy  whereupon 
the  king  sent  Eliakim  to  Isaiah^  and  received  an  answer  from  him  ;  whilst  the 
other,  contained  in  xix.  8-34  (=/r.  xxxvii.  8-35)  but  abbreviated  and  adapted 
to  the  preceding,  relates  that  the  summons  was  sent  in  a  letter  from  Libnah  by 
messengers^  that  Hezekiah  took  the  letter  into  the  temple,  and  that  Isaiah  with- 
out previous  communication  from  the  king,  sent  an  oracle  from  Jehovah  to  him. 
This  view  is  confirmed  by  the  parallelism  between  xviii.  33-35  and  xix.  II-13 
and  between  xix.  7  and  xix.  28 :  but  if  correct,  the  two  versions  have  been 
adjusted  to  each  other  in  xix.  8-9. 

The  calamity  which  overtook  the  Assyrian  host  is,  in  2  Kg.  xix.  35,  repre- 
sented as  the  work  of  an  angel,  a  description  elsewhere  appUed  to  a  pestilence 
(see  2  Sam.  xxiv.  15-16).  Hdt.  ii.  141  relates  that  when  the  Assyrian  and 
Egyptian  armies  lay  opposite  one  another  near  Pelusium,  a  multitude  of  field 
mice  devoured  the  quivers  and  bow-strings  of  the  invaders,  who  next  morning 
commenced  their  flight,  and  great  numbers  fell.  A  stone  statue  of  the  Eg}'p- 
tian  king  (whom  Herodotus  calls  Sethos)  holding  a  mouse  in  his  hand,  existed 
in  the  temple  of  Ptah  to  commemorate  the  event. 

The  signal  deliverance  which  Israel  thus  experienced  can 
scarcely  fail  to  have  influenced  the  people  to  some  extent  for 
good.  Announced  and  interpreted  as  it  was  by  Isaiah,  it  must 
have  both  purified  and  strengthened  for  a  time  the  national  faith 
in  Jehovah.  But  the  impressions  received  by  one  generation  are 
not  often  transmitted  to  the  next  in  their  integrity ;  and  the  most 
permanent  conviction  derived  from  the  eventful  history  here  re- 
counted was  the  belief  that  Jerusalem,  solely  in  virtue  of  its  being 
the  seat  of  Jehovah's  Temple,  was  impregnable. 

Hezekiah  lived  some  years  after  the  occurrences  just  recorded ; 
but  nothing  further  is  related  of  his  reign.  He  displayed  literary 
proclivities,  for  a  collection  of  proverbs  ascribed  to  Solomon  were 

*  Sharezer  is  probably  abbreviated  from  Nergal- sharezer  or  A sshur- sharezer , 
see  Maspero,  op.  cit.^  p.  346. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  373 

"copied  out"  under  his  direction  {Prov.  xxv.  i),  and  a  poem 
which  he  composed  as  a  thanksgiving  for  his  recovery  from  illness 
is  preserved  in  Is.  xxxix.  9  foil,  though,  if  his,  it  has  been  adapted 
to  hturgical  use  (see  ver.  20).  According  to  the  Chronicler,  he 
also  organised  the  music  of  the  Temple  services  {2  Ch.  xxix.  30, 
xxxi.  2),  and  certain  psalms  (xlvi.,  xlvii.,  xlviii.,  Ixxv.,  Ixxvi.)  have 
with  some  plausibility  been  assigned  to  his  reign. 

The  successor  of  Hezekiah  was  his  son  MANASSEH,  who 
according  to  2  Kg.  xxi.  i,  was  a  mere  boy  of  twelve  when  he  came 
to  the  throne.  His  reign  was  marked  by  a  great  declension  in  the 
direction  of  idolatry.  The  "  high  places  "  abolished  by  Hezekiah 
were  once  more  restored,  altars  were  erected  to  Baal,  and  the 
adoration  of  the  host  of  heaven  (not  hitherto  laid  to  the  charge 
of  any  Judaean  sovereign,  though  mentioned  in  connection  with 
the  kingdom  of  Israel,  see  Am.  v.  26,  2  Kg.  xvii.  16)  was  intro- 
duced. Even  in  the  Temple  an  Asherah  was  raised,  images  of 
the  horses  and  chariots  of  the  sun  were  placed  at  the  entry  of  it 
(2  Kg.  xxiii.  n),  and  the  immorahties  generally  associated  with 
Canaanite  worship  were  practised  there  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  7).  Like 
his  predecessor  Ahaz,  the  king  also  made  his  son  to  pass  through 
the  fire,  and  had  recourse  to  augury  and  enchantments.  To 
crown  his  misdeeds,  he  filled  Jerusalem  with  innocent  blood,  his 
victims  doubtless  including  many  of  the  prophets  of  Jehovah 
who  uttered  a  protest  against  his  crimes  (2  Kg.  xxi.  16,  xxiv.  4, 
oi.Jcr.  ii.  30). 

It  is  probable  that  of  Manasseh's  impieties  the  worship  of  the 
host  of  heaven  was  connected  with  his  relations  with  Assyria. 
The  extensive  ravages  of  Sennacherib  must  have  left  Judah,  at 
the  beginning  of  Manasseh's  reign,  extremely  weak;  and  though 
Sennacherib  himself  refrained  from  making  any  further  expe- 
dition in  the  direction  of  Egypt  and  Palestine,  his  earher  policy 
was  renewed  by  his  successors  Esar-haddon  (681-668)  and 
Asshurbanipal  (668-626).  Esar-haddon,  after  putting  down  the 
insurrection  which  resulted  in  the  murder  of  his  father,  and 
driving  his  brother  Sharezer  into  Armenia,  advanced  into  Egypt, 
captured  Memphis  (Noph),  and  drove  Tirhakah,  who  had  killed 
Shabatak  and  now  occupied  the  Egyptian  throne,  into  Ethiopia. 
The  countries  which  lay  on  the  route  taken  by  the  Assyrian  armies 


374  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

could  scarcely  be  left  in  independence;  and  the  Assyrian  king 
in  his  inscriptions  records  that  he  took  Zidon,  and  claims  as  his 
vassals  the  kings  of  Tyre,  Gebal,  Arv'ad,  Edom,  Moab,  Ammon, 
the  Philistine  cities  of  Gaza,  Oath,  Ashkelon,  Ashdod,  and  Ekron, 
and  the  land  of  Judah  under  its  king  Manasseh.^  This  humilia- 
tion doubtless  obliterated  much  of  the  impression  produced  by 
the  deliverance  experienced  in  the  previous  reign.  The  success 
of  Assyria's  soldiers  argued  to  many  minds  the  superiority  of 
Assyria's  gods ;  and  there  was  always  in  Judah  a  section  of  the 
people  that  was  prepared  to  lend  a  ready  ear  to  such  representa- 
tions. Religious  motives,  too,  would  be  reinforced  by  political 
considerations;  and  the  respect  extorted  by  the  conqueror  for 
himself  it  was  prudent  to  extend  to  his  deities.  The  fluctuation 
in  the  nation's  fortunes  were  thus  once  more  reflected  in  the 
condition  of  the  national  religion ;  and  the  inconstancy  of  the 
Hebrew  people  to  their  God  received  renewed  illustration.  Esar- 
haddon's  son  and  successor  Asshurbanipal,  though,  as  already 
stated,  he  planted  additional  colonists  in  Samaria,  does  not  appear 
to  have  interfered  with  Judah.  The  Jewish  kingdom,  however, 
must  have  watched  with  painful  interest  his  invasion  of  Egypt. 
There  Tirhakah  had  recommenced  the  war;  but  he  met  with 
no  success,  and  Thebes  was  entered  by  the  Assyrian  forces,  though 
on  the  surrender  of  its  treasures  it  was  left  unharmed.  On  this 
occasion  Asshurbanipal  displayed  towards  the  conquered  a  degree 
of  clemency  unusual  in  an  Assyrian  sovereign,  and  restored  Necho, 
ruler  of  the  feudatory  kingdom  of  Sais,  who  had  intrigued  with 
Tirhakah,  to  his  realm  and  honours.  Tirhakah  in  665  was 
followed  on  the  throne  by  Urdamani  (otherwise  Rud-Amon  or 
Tanuatamanu)  ;  and  on  his  revolting,  Asshurbanipal  again 
invaded  Egypt,  and  this  time  he  sacked  Thebes  (the  No-amon 
of  Nah.  iii.  8-10).  Manasseh,  who  enjoyed  an  exceptionally 
long  reign,  reached  the  close  of  his  life  in  tranquillity ;  and  at  his 
death  was  buried  in  the  garden  of  his  own  house  (apparently 
called  also  the  garden  of  Uzza)  {2  Kg,  xxi.  1-18,  2  Ch. 
xxxiii.   1-20). 

Of  actual    conflict   between  Manasseh   and    the   contemporary   Assyrian 
sovereign  no  record  occurs  in  the  book  of  Kings.     But  the  Chronicler  relates 

*  Schrader,  op.  cit.^  ii.  p.  41. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  375 

that  in  consequence  of  his  sins  Jehovah  brought  upon  him  the  captains  of  the 
host  of  the  king  of  Assyria  who  carried  him  in  chains  ^  to  Babylon  ;  that  there 
he  humbled  himself  before  Jehovah,''^  and  his  repentance  and  supplication 
being  accepted,  he  was  restored  once  more  to  his  kingdom  ;  that  on  his  return 
to  Jerusalem  he  strengthened  the  defences  of  the  city  by  the  construction  of  an 
outer  wall  and  other  fortifications,  and  placed  able  officers  in  command  of 
the  provincial  fortresses  ;  and  that  he  also  effected  a  religious  reformation,  re- 
moving the  idols  from  the  Temple  and  renewing  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  though 
the  high  places  were  retained.  If  this  statement  is  historical,  the  captivity 
of  Manasseh  is  most  plausibly  referred  to  the  reign  of  Asshurbanipal.  The 
latter's  brother  Shamash-shum-ukin,  who  had  been  made  by  Esar-haddon 
viceroy  of  Babylon,  rose  in  insurrection  against  Asshurbanipal  (to  whom 
Esar-haddon  had  assigned  Assyria)  shortly  before  648  B.C.  ;  and  found 
sympathisers  in  certain  of  the  Palestinian  states,  amongst  whom  Manasseh 
may  have  been  included.  The  insurrection,  however,  was  suppressed  ;  and 
the  Jewish  king  may  have  been  punished  for  complicity.  His  removal  to 
Babylon  may  readily  be  explained  by  the  assumption  that  Asshurbanipal  had 
previously  proceeded  thither  to  receive  in  person  the  submission  of  the 
Babylonian  insurgents ;  whilst  a  parallel  to  the  alleged  restoration  of  the 
Jewish  king  is  afforded  by  the  fact  that  Asshurbanipal,  after  carrying  in  chains 
to  Nineveh  the  Egyptian  princehng  Necho,  subsequently  (as  just  related) 
replaced  him  on  the  throne.  But  besides  the  absence  in  2  Kings  of  any 
account  of  the  events  recorded  in  Chronicles,  the  narrative  of  the  latter  is 
difi'icult  to  harmonise  with  (i)  the  existence  of  Manasseh's  idolatrous  altars 
in  the  reign  of  Josiah  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  12),  (2)  Jeremiah's  declaration  in  the 
subsequent  reign  of  Jehoiakim  (xv.  4,  cf.  2  Kg.  xxiii.  26)  that  Manasseh's 
sins  had  not  yet  been  expiated,  (3)  the  behef  of  the  citizens  in  Jeremiah's 
time  (vii.  4)  that  the  Temple  ensured  the  protection  of  the  capital — a  belief 
which  could  scarcely  have  been  entertained  if  Jerusalem  had  so  recently 
been  entered  and  its  king  taken. 

Manasseh  was  succeeded  by  his  son  AMON,  who  is  said  to  have 
been  only  twenty-two  when  he  began  to  reign.  His  tendencies 
in  religion,  so  far  as  they  had  time  to  manifest  themselves,  are 
described  by  the  historian  as  being  similar  to  those  of  his  father, 
though  it  is  noteworthy  that  the  syllable  JAH  enters  into  the 
name  of  his  son.  But  his  career  was  cut  short  by  a  conspiracy 
amongst  his  servants,  who  killed  him  in  his  own  house  after  a 
brief  reign  of  two  years.  Like  his  father,  he  was  buried  in  the 
garden  of  Uzza.  The  conspirators  who  destroyed  him  found  no 
support  among  the  people,  who  put  them  to  death,  and  raised  to 
the  throne  his  young  son  JOSIAH. 

Ever  since  the  time  of  Jotham  (if  the  short  reign  of  Amon  be 
ignored)  the  worship  of  Jehovah  had  been  predominant  and  re- 

^  2  Ch.  xxxiii.  1 1  marg.  with  hooks.  On  a  monument  of  Esar-haddon  two 
captive  princes  are  represented  with  hooks  or  rings  in  their  lips,  to  which  a 
cord  is  attached  which  the  Assyrian  king  holds. 

"^  A  composition,  stated  to  be  the  prayer  which  Manasseh  offered  up  when 
a  prisoner  at  Babylon  is  preserved  in  the  Apocrypha. 


376  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

trogressive  by  turns  under  the  rule  of  successive  kings ;  and  the 
sequence  of  alternation  was  still  maintained  under  that  of  Josiah. 
He  was  only  seven  years  old  when  he  ascended  the  throne  of  his 
murdered  father.  During  his  minority,  no  doubt  the  affairs  of 
the  kingdom  (including  the  state-worship)  were  directed  by  those 
who  had  possessed  the  confidence  of  Amon ;  but  the  training  of 
the  youthful  sovereign  perhaps  fell  to  the  care  of  guardians  who 
were  more  in  sympathy  with  the  traditional  faith  of  the  nation. 
Moreover,  as  he  grew  up,  the  people  at  large  were  roused  to  the 
need  of  a  religious  reform  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah,  the  son  of 
Hilkiah,  a  native  of  Anathoth,  who  began  his  ministry  in  the 
thirteenth  year  of  Josiah's  reign,  and  by  his  rebukes  of  the  preva- 
lent idolatry  and  immorality  sought  to  bring  about  a  change  for 
the  better.  Force  was  given  to  Jeremiah's  announcement  of 
a  judgment  impending  over  the  nation,  if  impenitent,  by  the 
threatening  approach  of  hordes  of  Scythians,  who,  as  will  be 
mentioned  later,  were  at  this  time  overrunning  the  neighbouring 
countries.  In  consequence  of  the  prophet's  earnestness,  Josiah 
began  the  work  of  reformation  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  his  reign 
by  repairing  the  Temple,  and  Hilkiah,  the  high  priest  (perhaps 
identical  with  the  father  of  Jeremiah),  was  directed  to  apply  to 
this  purpose  the  money  received  from  those  who  entered  the 
building.^  In  the  course  of  the  repairs  an  incident  occurred 
which  greatly  strengthened  the  king's  purpose.  A  book  of  the 
Law  was  found  which  Hilkiah  delivered  to  Shaphan,  the  royal 
scribe;  and  he,  after  perusing  it,  conveyed  it  to  Josiah.  The 
latter  ordered  the  book  to  be  read  to  him ;  and  he  was  so  im- 
pressed by  the  denunciations  recorded  in  it  against  idolatry,  that 
in  alarm,  he  rent  his  clothes  and  sent  a  deputation  to  consult  a 
prophetess  named  Huldah.  She  in  reply  (if  the  narrative  repro- 
duces her  actual  words)^  declared  that  the  guilt  of  the  nation  was 
so  great  that  the  Divine  wrath  was  unappeasable;  but  that  in 
view  of  Josiah's  contrition,  the  threatened  vengeance  would  be 
deferred  till  after  his  death.     On  receiving  the  response  of  the 

^  Cf.  the  arrangements  in  the  time  of  Joash  {2  Kg.  xii.  4,  9  foil. ). 

'  Some  have  thought,  from  the  zeal  shown  by  the  king  and  people,  that 
the  reply  of  the  prophetess  was  less  disheartening  than  it  is  represented  to 
have  been  in  2  Kg.  xxii.  16-20;  and  that  her  words  have  been  modified  in 
the  light  of  after  events.     Perhaps  ver.  18-20  are  original. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  377 

prophetess,  the  king  made  the  contents  of  the  book  public 
by  ordering  it  to  be  read  at  an  assembly  gathered  at  the  Temple. 
The  fact  that  the  book  was  brief  enough  to  be  thus  read  at 
a  single  assembly  ^  suggests  that  it  did  not  comprise  the  whole 
of  the  Pentateuch  (which  there  is  likewise  reason  to  believe  was 
not  completed  by  this  date) ;  and  the  description  of  it  as  "  the 
book  of  the  covenant "  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  2)  identifies  it  with  one  or 
other  of  the  two  which  are  implied  in  Ex.  xxiv.  7  and  Deut 
xxix.  I  (cf.  xxxi.  24).  But  the  threatening  tone  of  it  (2  Kg. 
xxii.  13)  agrees  better  with  the  contents  of  Deuteronomy  (see  Dent. 
vi.  15,  xxviii.  15-68,  xxix.  10-29);  and  its  substantial  identity 
with  the  latter  is  practically  put  beyond  doubt  by  the  fact  that  the 
most  characteristic  injunctions  of  Deuteronomy  formed  the  basis 
of  the  reformation  which  Josiah  at  once  undertook.^  The  king 
and  the  people,  having  first  solemnly  agreed  to  stand  by  the 
covenant  described  in  the  book,  then  proceeded  to  execute  the 
commands  of  Jehovah  set  forth  therein.  The  Asherah  and 
the  various  vessels  used  for  idolatrous  purposes  were  removed 
from  the  Temple  (cf.  Deut.  xii.  3) ;  the  priests  called  Chemari7n^ 
together  with  those  who  burned  incense  to  Baal  and  to  the  host 
of  heaven  were  put  down  (cf  Deut.  xvii.  3  foil.) ;  the  immorali- 
ties practised  in  connection  with  religion  were  suppressed  (cf. 
Deut.  xxiii.  17-18);  Topheth  (the  place  in  the  valley  of  Hinnom 
where  children  were  made  to  pass  through  the  fire)  was  defiled 
(cf.  Deut.  xviii.  10);  and  finally,  the  "high  places"  were  abolished 
(cf.  Deut.  xii.  5-14).  Some  of  these  had  been  dedicated  to  the 
worship  of  such  beings  as  Satyrs;*  but  many  were  doubtless  still 
ostensibly  devoted  to  the  service  of  Jehovah,  as  had  been  the 
case  in  previous  reigns.  They  afforded,  however,  such  scope 
for  abuses  (cf.  Jer.  ii.  20,  iii.  2,  Ezek.  vi.  13)  that  it  was  now 
determined  to  carry  out  completely  the  reformation  which  had 

*  Contrast  Neh.  viii.  i8. 

"^  Whether  the  book  found  in  the  Temple  included  the  wholl  of  Deuter- 
onomy is  doubtful.  The  fact  that  the  introduction  iv.  44-49  is  preceded  by 
another  in  i.  1-5  makes  it  probable  that  the  latter,  together  with  the  rest  of 
c.  i.-iv.  43,  is  a  subsequent  addition,  whilst  c.  xxxii.  and  xxxiv.  certainly 
contain  passages  of  different,  and  in  some  instances  later,  origin  (cf.  Introd, 
p.  8).  3  Qi  ff„^^  X.  5,  Zeph.  i.  4. 

*  \n  2  Kg.  xxiii.  8  for  the  unintelligible  high  places  of  the  gates  should  be 
substituted  high  places  of  the  he-goats  (or  Satyrs) ;  see  Lev.  xvii.  7,  2  Ch.  xi.  15. 


378  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

been  attempted  by  Hezekiab,  and  in  accordance  with  the  re- 
quirements of  the  book  recently  discovered,  to  confine  all  public 
worship  of  Jehovah  to  a  single  sanctuary.  This  could  only  be 
the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  the  superiority  of  which  over  all  com- 
peting holy  places  had  not  only  been  implied  in  the  pre-eminence 
assigned  to  it  in  the  prophetic  utterances  of  Isaiah  and  Micah 
{Is.  ii.  2,  xviii.  7,  xxviii.  16,  Mic.  iv.  2),  but  evidenced  (as  was 
believed)  by  the  immunity  which  it  had  enjoyed  from  the  devas- 
tation brought  upon  the  rest  by  Sennacherib.  The  new  departure 
had  important,  and  rather  complex,  consequences  for  the  religious 
future  of  the  people.  In  the  first  place  it  helped  to  safeguard 
the  faith  and  service  of  Jehovah  from  the  contamination  to  which 
these  were  exposed  in  country  localities.  Not  only  was  the  level 
of  religious  thought  and  practice  Hkely  to  be  higher  at  the  capital 
than  in  the  provinces,  but  the  existence  of  only  one  place  of 
worship  was  in  itself  a  standing  protest  against  the  worship  of  a 
plurality  of  gods.  In  the  second  place,  it  prepared  the  way  for 
the  eventual  dissemination  of  less  materiaHstic  notions  of  worship 
than  those  connected  with  animal  offerings,  for  owing  to  the 
distance  separating  the  central  sanctuary  from  the  more  remote 
parts  of  the  land,  it  was  no  longer  possible  to  treat  every  instance 
when  a  domestic  animal  was  slaughtered  for  food  as  an  act  of 
sacrifice  {Deut.  xii.  15).  But  thirdly,  it  contributed  to  strengthen 
and  perpetuate  the  conceptions  of  local  limitations  attaching  to 
the  Divine  presence,  and  consequently  in  this  respect,  trammelled 
and  checked  the  development  of  spiritual  religion.  Incidentally, 
the  measure  inflicted  some  hardship  upon  the  priests  who  were 
accustomed  to  minister  at  the  local  shrines;  for  in  spite  of  the 
directions  of  the  newly-found  Law-book  {Beut.  xviii.  6-8)  they 
were  not  admitted  to  a  share  in  the  sacrifices  offered  at  the 
central  sanctuary  at  Jerusalem,  but  had  to  remain  in  their  former 
abodes  and  be  supported  by  their  brethren  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  9).  The 
land  was  likewise  cleared  of  wizards,  and  such  as  professed  to 
have  familiar  spirits;  and  the  teraphivi  used  in  divination  were 
destroyed.  The  authority  at  this  time  exercised  by  Assyria  over 
what  had  once  been  the  kingdom  of  Israel  v/as  small ;  and  Josiah 
extended  his  work  of  reformation  beyond  his  own  borders  (which 
reached  on  the  north  to  Geba).     At  Bethel  he  defiled  the  altar 


ISRAEL   AND   JUDAH  379 

erected  by  Jeroboam,  the  son  of  Nebat,  by  burning  on  it  bones 
taken  from  the  adjoining  sepulchres,  only  refraining  from  disturb- 
ing the  tomb  of  the  prophet  who  is  related  to  have  denounced 
the  worship  which  Jeroboam  inaugurated  (/  Kg.  xiii.).  The 
king's  zeal  not  unnaturally  led  him  to  keep  the  Passover  in  his 
eighteenth  year  with  a  splendour  which  in  the  estimate  of  the 
historian  made  it  ecHpse  all  preceding  celebrations  of  that  feast. 
In  accomplishing  his  purposes  Josiah  must  have  received  great 
support  from  the  denunciations  and  exhortations  addressed  to 
the  people  not  only  by  Jeremiah  but  also  by  Zephaniah,  whose 
prophetic  ministry  fell  within  Josiah's  lifetime. 

The  account  of  Josiah's  reforms  contained  in  Chronicles  {2  Ch.  xxxiv., 
XXXV.)  differs  from  that  furnished  by  2  Kings  in  stating  that  the  purification  of 
Judah  from  the  "high  places,"  the  Asherim,  and  the  images,  began  in  the 
twelfth  year  of  his  reign  (preceding  by  six  years  the  discovery  of  the  Law- 
book) ;  see  2  Ch.  xxxiv.  3-7. 

Meanwhile  the  political  world  was  witnessing  a  considerable 
shifting  in  the  balance  of  power.  The  extension  of  Josiah's 
influence  over  the  former  territory  of  Israel  is  an  indication  (as 
already  observed)  of  the  waning  of  Assyrian  authority  which 
began  after  the  death  of  Asshurbanipal.  That  king  died  in 
626,  and  was  succeeded  by  Asshur-etil-ilani ;  and  during  his 
reign  and  that  of  his  son,  whose  name  has  been  conjectured 
to  be  Sin-shar-ish-kin,  the  Assyrian  empire  rapidly  declined.  Its 
eventual  downfall  was  accomplished  by  the  Medes.  This  people, 
which  occupied  the  country  between  mount  Zagros  and  the 
Caspian  Sea,  had  been  converted  from  an  aggregate  of  tribes 
living  in  villages  into  a  united  nation  under  a  leader  styled  by  the 
Greek  historians  Deioces,  who  became  their  first  king.  He  was 
succeeded  by  Phraortes  (Fravartish),  who  invaded  Assyria  about 
the  close  of  the  reign  of  Asshurbanipal,  but  was  overthrown, 
and  perished  with  the  greater  part  of  his  army.  His  son 
Cyaxares  (Havakshatara),  however,  having  improved  the  organisa- 
tion of  his  forces,  renewed  the  attack  and  defeated  the  Assyrians 
in  an  engagement  before  Nineveh,  which  he  besieged.  But 
before  he  succeeded  in  reducing  it,  he  was  compelled  to  with- 
draw by  an  inroad  of  the  Scythians,  a  race  of  nomads,  who 
occupied  settlements  beyond  the  Caucasus.  This  people,  leaving 
their  European  homes,  now  entered  Media  in  vast  numbers,  and 


38o  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

vanquishing  Cyaxares,  spread  over  a  large  part  of  western  Asia. 
They  traversed  Palestine  and  penetrated  as  far  as  the  borders  of 
Egypt,  whence  the  reigning  Pharaoh,  Psammetichus,  induced 
them  to  return.  According  to  Herodotus  (i.  io6)  their  over- 
throw was  effected  through  the  treacherous  murder  of  their  chiefs 
by  Cyaxares,  at  a  banquet  to  which  he  had  invited  them.  Be 
this  as  it  may,  their  domination  ultimately  came  to  an  end ;  and 
the  Medes,  recovering  their  power,  renewed  their  attacks  upon 
Nineveh.  In  this  undertaking,  Cyaxares  found  an  ally  in 
Babylon,  over  which  a  Chaldean  called  Nabopolassar  (Nabu- 
baluzur)  had  been  made  viceroy  by  Asshurbanipal.  Nabopolassar, 
assuming  independence  of  his  suzerain,  combined  with  the 
Median  sovereign  in  his  assault  upon  Nineveh;  and  the  city 
fell  before  their  united  forces  in  607  B.C.  (cf.  Nah,  i.-iii.,  Ezek, 
xxxi.  3  foil.). 

In  the  west  the  retreat  of  Assyria  was  accompanied  by  a 
corresponding  advance  on  the  part  of  Egypt.  There  Psamme- 
tichus,  who  was  son  of  the  Necho  towards  whom  Asshurbanipal 
had  displayed  such  exceptional  clemency,^  took  advantage  of 
the  Assyrian  troubles,  and  about  664  acquired  independence  for 
Egypt,  and  established  once  more  a  native  dynasty  (the  26th). 
His  successor,  Necho  II.,  came  to  the  throne  in  610  when  the 
Assyrian  empire  was  on  the  brink  of  its  overthrow;  and  the 
Egyptian  king,  desiring  to  share  its  spoil,  marched  northward 
to  attack  it.  As  has  been  already  observed,  Assyrian  control 
over  Palestine  by  this  time  had  become  relaxed;  and  Josiah 
was  unwilling  to  see  the  extension  of  his  authority  endangered 
by  the  Egyptian  advance.  He  accordingly  determined  to  oppose 
Necho,  as  he  proceeded  northward  by  the  main  route  which 
crosses  the  ridge  of  Carmel,  and  encountering  him  at  Megiddo, 
there  met  his  end.  The  manner  of  his  death  is  not  related 
by  the  historian  of  Kings  /^  but  the  Chronicler  asserts  that  he 
was  killed  in  battle,  and  is  confirmed  in  a  measure  by  the 
statement  of  Herodotus  (ii.  159)  that  Necho  fought  with,  and 
defeated,  the  Syrians  at  Magdolus  (which  probably  represents 
Megiddo).  His  dead  body  was  brought  to  Jerusalem  for  burial ; 
and   his    death    was    bitterly   bewailed    by    his    subjects,    the 

^  See  p.  374.  ^  In  2  Kg.  xxii.  20  a  peaceful  end  is  predicted  for  him. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  381 

lamentation   raised   over   him   being  long   remembered   {2   Ch. 

XXXV.  25).     The  disaster  was  in  truth  irretrievable.     It  brought 

to  a  close  a  life  which  was  inestimable  to  his  country;  for  Judah 

was  now  exposed  to  an  aggrieved  and  successful  enemy,  and 

there  was  no  one  left  capable  of  offering  an  adequate  defence. 

Moreover,  the  overthrow  and  death  of  so  devoted  a  servant  of 

Jehovah  could  scarcely  fail  to  discourage  the  party  of  moral  and 

religious  reform.     It  must  have  seemed  to  many  that  Jehovah 

had  forsaken  His  land  (cf.  Ezek.  viii.  12,  ix.  9);  and  the  Divine 

anger  might  even  be  plausibly  explained   as  provoked  by  the 

destruction  of  the  country  sanctuaries.     Henceforward  (as  will 

appear)  the  weakness  and  corruption  of  the  nation  met  with 

no  arrest. 

According  to  2  Ch.  xxxv.  20  foil.,  Necho  deprecated  Josiah's  hostility,  and 
declared  that  he  was  come  not  against  him,  but  against  the  nation  (Babylon) 
with  which  he  had  war,  and  against  which  he  had  been  bidden  by  God  to 
march,  at  the  same  time  warning  the  Judsean  king  not  to  provoke  God  by  his 
interference.  Josiah,  however,  disregarded  the  counsel,  and  entered  the 
battle  in  disguise  like  Ahab  before  Ramoth  Gilead.  In  the  engagement  he 
was  mortally  wounded  by  the  archers,  and  being  carried  from  the  battlefield, 
died  at  Jerusalem.  The  narrative  looks  like  an  explanation  devised  to  account 
for  the  death  of  so  exemplary  a  king. 

To  succeed  Josiah  the  people  chose  his  son  JEHOAHAZ,  who 
was  also  known  as  SHALLUM  i^Jer.  xxii.  11,  /  Ch.  iii.  15). 
He  was  not  the  eldest  son  of  Josiah;  but  was  selected  by 
popular  acclamation,  perhaps  because  of  all  Josiah's  four  children 
(z  Ch.  iii.  15)^  he  seemed  most  likely  to  carry  out  his  policy. 
If  so,  the  hopes  raised  were  disappointed.  After  reigning  for 
only  three  months,  he  was  forced  to  appear  before  Necho  at 
Riblah  (a  town  on  the  Orontes,  between  Damascus  and  Hamath), 
and  there  put  in  chains  and  carried  to  Egypt  {oi.  Jer.  xxii.  10-12, 
Ezek.  xix.  1-4).  A  fine  of  a  talent  of  gold  (LXX.  100  talents) 
and  100  talents  of  silver  was  imposed  on  the  country;  and 
Necho  placed  on  the  throne  Jehoahaz'  half-brother  Eliakim,  in 
whose  loyalty  to  himself  he  presumably  had  greater  confidence, 
at  the  same  time  changing  his  name  to  JEHOIAKIM. 

Jehoiakim  was  very  different  in  character  from  his  father 
Josiah;  and  throughout  his  reign  oppression,  violence,  and 
idolatry  were  rife.  The  tribute  required  by  the  Egyptian  king 
*  Jpsiab's  eldest  son  was  named  Johanan, 


382  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

was  obtained  from  the  people  by  taxation,  not  defrayed  out  of 
the  treasures  accumulated  in  the  Temple  and  the  royal  palace. 
Strange  and  repulsive  rites  began  to  be  practised,  many  of  the 
prevalent  varieties  of  worship  being  imported  from  abroad. 
The  success  of  Necho  over  Josiah  had  attracted  attention  to 
the  beliefs  and  usages  of  Egypt,  and  figures  of  animals,  such 
as  were  venerated  in  that  country,  were  pourtrayed  on  the 
walls  of  the  Temple  {Ezek.  viii.  lo);  whilst  among  other 
observances  which  obtained  at  this  time  were  the  adoration 
of  the  sun  (Ezek.  viii.  i6) — a  cult  previously  introduced  by 
Manasseh  (2  Kg.  xxiii.  5,  11) — and  the  weeping  for  Tammuz, 
a  Babylonian  and  Syrian  hero  or  demi-god,  corresponding  to 
the  Greek  Adonis.  Against  the  prevailing  evils  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  raised  his  voice,  and  denounced  doom  upon  the  guilty 
land.  Unlike  his  predecessor  Isaiah,  he  declared  that  Jerusalem, 
in  the  event  of  its  inhabitants  failing  to  repent,  would  be  as 
totally  destroyed  as  Shiloh,  the  prediction  exciting  the  violent 
anger  of  the  priests  and  prophets  who  cherished  the  belief  that 
the  safety  of  the  capital  was  assured  by  the  existence  within 
it  of  the  Temple  {Jer.  vii.  4).  He  was  judged  worthy  of  death, 
but  was  saved  by  the  intervention  of  certain  elders,  notably 
Ahikam,  who  recalled  the  different  treatment  meted  out  to 
Micah  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah,  when  he  announced  a  similar 
destiny  for  the  city  {Jer.  xxvi.  1-19).  Another  prophet,  Uriah 
of  Kiriath  Jearim,  whose  utterances  were  of  the  same  tenor  as 
those  of  Jeremiah,  was  not  equally  fortunate.  He  fled  to  Egypt, 
but  the  relations  between  Jehoiakim  and  his  suzerain  Necho 
were  amicable  enough  to  enable  the  former  to  procure  his 
surrender;  and  he  was  then  put  to  death.  Politically,  there 
was  a  strong  party  in  the  country  which  advocated  the  main- 
tenance of  a  good  understanding  with  the  Egyptians;  but  the 
confidence  reposed  in  Egypt  was  not  shared  by  Jeremiah,  who 
foretold  that  a  judgment  was  in  store  for  that  nation  and  the 
surrounding  peoples,  who,  he  declared,  should  all  serve  the  king 
of  Babylon  (Jer.  c.  xxv.).  The  same  year  (the  fourth  of 
Jehoiakim's  reign)  witnessed  a  partial  fulfilment  of  his  pre- 
diction, for  Nebuchadrezzar,^  the  son  and  general  of  Nabopolassar 
*  In  2  Kg.  xxiv.  I,  etc,  spelt  mistakenly  Nebuchadnezzar. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  383 

the  conqueror  of  Nineveh,  defeated  the  Egyptian  forces  under 
Necho  at  Carchemish  {c.  605),  As  a  result  of  this  overthrow 
Judah,  with  the  other  territories  in  Palestine  claimed  by  Egypt, 
was  placed  at  the  mercy  of  the  Babylonians.  Nabopolassar, 
however,  died  shortly  after  the  battle  of  Carchemish;  and  his 
death  prevented  his  successor  Nebuchadrezzar  from  pursuing 
his  success  at  once.  This  respite  encouraged  Jehoiakim  in  his 
defiance  of  the  warnings  addressed  to  him  by  Jeremiah.  In 
the  year  following  the  engagement  at  Carchemish  Jeremiah 
directed  his  attendant  Baruch  to  read  a  roll  of  his  prophecies 
at  the  entrance  of  the  Temple  before  the  multitude.  Word 
of  this  was  carried  to  the  king  who  ordered  the  roll  to  be 
brought  to  him,  and  after  perusing  part  of  the  contents,  destroyed 
it,  and  commanded  both  Jeremiah  and  Baruch  to  be  arrested; 
but  they  were  providentially  hidden  {Jer.  c.  xxxvi.).  The  king's 
conduct  now  convinced  Jeremiah  that  the  Divine  judgment  in 
its  severest  form  would  overtake  the  city.  In  his  previous 
utterances  at  the  beginning  of  Jehoiakim's  reign  he  had  enter- 
tained and  expressed  hopes  of  the  nation's  repentance  and 
consequent  preservation  (see  xxvi.  3,  cf.  xviii.  11,  xxxvi.  3): 
but  in  the  enlarged  copy  which  he  made  of  the  roll  that  was 
destroyed  he  affirmed  unconditionally  the  overthrow  of  the 
country  and  the  dishonoured  end  of  its  ruler  (xxxvi.  29-31). 
When  Nebuchadrezzar  was  at  last  free  to  concern  himself  with 
Palestine,  Jehoiakim  submitted  to  him,  and  remained  his  vassal 
for  three  years.  On  the  lapse  of  that  period,  he  rebelled,  and 
the  land  was  in  consequence  overrun  by  the  Babylonian  forces, 
the  work  of  devastation  being  helped  by  bodies  of  Syrians, 
Moabites,  and  Ammonites.  The  country  population  was  driven 
within  the  walls  of  the  capital,  among  the  refugees  being  the 
nomadic  Rechabites  (see /er.  xxxv.  11);  and  the  capital  itself 
was  probably  threatened.  Further  details  of  Jehoiakim's  reign 
are  unfortunately  lacking,  and  his  end  is  obscure;  but  from  the 
account  in  2  Kg.  xxiv.  6  it  may  be  concluded  that  he  died  a 
natural  death. 

In  2  Ch.  xxxvi,  6  it  is  asserted  that  Jehoiakim  was  captured  by  Nebuchad- 
rezzar and  bound  in  chains  to  be  carried  to  Babylon  ;  and  that  with  him 
were  also  taken  some  of  the  vessels  of  the  Temple.  Nothing  of  this  appears 
in  2  Kings,  and  the  statement  harmonises  ill  with  the  siege  of  Jerusalem 


384  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

in  the  following  reign,  only  three  months  later.  It  is,  however,  repeated  in 
Dan.  i.  2  though  with  a  (Hscrepancy  in  the  date  (Jehoiakim's  capture  being 
placed  in  his  third  year,  contrary  to  the  evidence  oi  Jer.  xxxvi.  i,  9  and 
2  Kg.  xxiii.  36),  where  it  is  further  represented  that  Daniel,  together  with 
three  companions,  subsequently  known  as  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego, 
were  among  the  captives. 

On  the  other  hand,  Josephus  {Ant.  x.  6,  3)  states  that  Nebuchadrezzar 
being  admitted  into  the  city,  broke  his  pledges,  slew  Jehoiakim,  and  cast 
out  his  body  before  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  without  burial  (cf.  Jer,  xxii.  19) ; 
and  that  on  retiring  he  carried  with  him  as  captives  3,000  of  the  principal 
citizens,  including  the  prophet  Ezekiel. 

Jehoiakim  was  succeeded  by  his  son  JEHOIACHIN  (called 
also  JECONIAH  and  CONIAH),  who  was  only  eighteen  (2  Ch. 
xxxvi.  9,  (by  a  mistake)  eight)  years  of  age  at  his  accession,  and 
reigned  no  more  than  three  months  {2  Ch.  I.e.  three  months  and 
ten  days).  Jerusalem  was  now  invested;  and  when  Nebuchad- 
rezzar in  person  took  the  direction  of  the  besieging  force, 
Jehoiachin  capitulated.  He  himself,  his  family  and  his  house- 
hold, were  carried  to  Babylon,  and  with  him  was  deported  a 
large  body  of  the  most  capable  and  upright  citizens,^  though 
the  historian's  statement  that  none  were  left  except  the  poorest 
of  the  people  requires,  in  the  light  of  the  sequel,  some  qualifi- 
cation. With  the  captives  were  also  taken  the  treasures  of  the 
Temple  and  of  the  royal  palace.  The  prisoners  were  settled 
by  the  banks  of  the  Chebar,  a  river  in  Babylonia,  among  them 
being  the  prophet  Ezekiel  {Ezek.  i.  2). 

Josephus  [Ant.  x.  7,  i)  relates  that  Jehoiachin  was  made  king  by  Nebu- 
chadrezzar ;  but  that  the  latter,  fearing  that  Jehoiachin  would  resent  the 
death  of  his  father  (see  above),  shortly  afterwards  besieged  him  in  Jerusalem  ; 
whereupon  the  king,  in  order  to  save  the  city,  surrendered  himself,  though  the 
conditions  of  surrender  were  afterwards  ignored  by  the  conqueror. 

The  number  of  captives  is  variously  given  in  different  passages.  In  2  Kg. 
xxiv.  14  it  is  put  at  10,000  mighty  men,  besides  artisans ;  whilst  in  ver.  16 
it  is  stated  at  7,000  mighty  men  and  1,000  artisans.  This  capture  was  effected 
in  the  eighth  year  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  reign  {2  Kg.  xxiv.  12),  whilst  in 
Jer.  hi.  28  mention  is  made  of  3,023,  who  were  taken  in  Nebuchadrezzar's 
seventh  year,  without  any  allusion  to  a  deportation  of  prisoners  in  the  follow- 
ing year. 

Over  the  remnant  of  the  population  left  in  Jerusalem  Nebu- 
chadrezzar appointed  as  king  Mattaniah,  uncle  of  Jehoiachin, 
and    own    brother    to    Jehoahaz,   and    changed    his   name   to 

^  Jeremiah  represents  that  those  who  were  taken  to  Babylon  were  morally 
the  best,  and  those  who  were  left  at  Jerusalem  were  morally  the  worst,  of  the 
population  (see  c.  xxiv.). 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  385 

ZEDEKIAH.  He  is  characterised  unfavourably  by  the  his- 
torian of  Kings ;  but  his  misconduct  seems  to  have  been  due 
as  much  to  weakness  as  to  wickedness ;  and  certain  incidents 
in  his  relations  with  Jeremiah  show  that  he  had  a  merciful  dis- 
position. During  the  early  part  of  his  reign  the  new  king 
submitted  peaceably  to  his  suzerain,  to  whom  he  was  bound 
by  oath  {Ezek.  xvii.  13,2  Ch.  xxxvi.  1 3) ;  and  even  sent  a  small 
party  to  Babylon  with  a  letter  from  Jeremiah,  counselling  the 
exiles,  taken  thither  with  Jehoiachin,  to  be  quiet  subjects  of  the 
Babylonian  sovereign  (see  Jer.  xxix.).  Subsequently,  however, 
he  was  approached  by  envoys  from  Edom,  Moab,  Ammon,  Tyre, 
and  Zidon,  who  wished  to  concert  with  the  Judaean  king  a  general 
rising  against  Babylonian  supremacy  {Jer.  xxvii.,  and  cf.  xlviii. 
and  xlix.).  Against  the  proposal  a  warning  was  raised  by  Jeremiah, 
who  declared  that  the  undertaking  could  only  result  in  greater 
evils;  and  possibly  Zedekiah's  visit  to  Babylon  (mentioned  in 
Jer.  li.  59)  was  the  result  of  a  summons  to  clear  himself  of 
suspicions  which  had  been  raised.  But  the  faction  hostile  to 
Babylonian  authority  was  both  active  and  confident  (cf.  Ezek. 
xi.  2-6) ;  and  when  hope  was  eventually  entertained  of  getting 
support  from  the  king  of  Egypt,  with  whom,  indeed,  Zedekiah, 
in  spite  of  his  engagements  with  Nebuchadrezzar,  entered  into 
negotiations  (see  Ezek.  xvii.  15),  rebellion  was  finally  decided 
upon.  In  consequence,  Jerusalem  was  once  more  beleaguered, 
the  siege  lasting  a  year  and  a  half.^  In  the  course  of  it,  an 
Egyptian  force  advanced  to  its  relief,  and  the  investing  army 
for  a  time  retired.  Jeremiah  continued  to  protest  against  the 
poHcy  pursued,  and  declared  that  the  Egyptian  forces  would 
retreat  and  the  siege  be  renewed  (Jer.  xxxvii.  i-io).  In  the 
interval,  however,  between  the  raising  of  the  siege  and  the  return 
of  the  Babylonian  army,  ne  attempted  to  leave  the  city  to  go 
to  his  patrimony  at  Anathoth,  and  was,  in  consequence,  charged 
with  desertion,  and  in  spite  of  his  denial,  was  lodged  in  prison, 
from  which  he  was  only  delivered  by  the  interposition  of  Zedekiah 
himself,  who  committed  him  to  the  court  of  the  guard  (Jer. 
xxxvii.    11-21).      But  though  he  could  deny  any  intention  on 

^  From  the  tenth  month  of  Zedekiah's  ninth  year  to  the  fourth  month  of 
his  eleventh  year. 

2    C 


386  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

his  own  part  of  passing  over  to  the  enemy,  he  had  counselled 
others,  who  wished  to  save  their  lives,  to  do  so  {Jer.  xxi.  i-io), 
and  some  of  the  leading  princes,  who  seem  to  have  domineered 
over  the  king  (see  Jer,  xxxviii.  5),  clamoured  for  his  death,  on 
the  ground  that  he  weakened  the  defence  of  the  city.  He  was 
accordingly  flung  into  a  foul  dungeon,  from  which  he  was  once 
more  rescued,  with  the  king's  consent,  by  an  Ethiopian  called 
Ebed-melech.  He  remained  in  the  court  of  the  guard,  and  was 
there  visited  by  the  king,  whom  he  urged  to  surrender  (Jer. 
xxxviii).  During  the  progress  of  the  siege  the  city  suffered  severely 
from  famine  {Jer,  xxxvii.  21,  2  Kg.  xxv.  3);  and  ultimately 
a  sally,  in  which  the  king  took  part,  was  made  by  night  in  the 
hope  of  an  escape  by  the  way  of  the  Jordan  valley  into  Gilead. 
But  the  fugitives  were  pursued  and  captured  in  the  plains  of 
Jericho;  and  Zedekiah  was  brought  before  Nebuchadrezzar  at 
Riblah.  There  he  underwent  a  kind  of  trial,  at  the  close  of 
which  his  sons  were  put  to  death  before  him,  his  eyes  were  put 
out,  and  he  was  then  carried,  blind  and  fettered,  to  Babylon 
(2  Kg.  xxv.  7,  cf.  Ezek.  xii.  13).  A  month  later,  Nebuzaradan, 
captain  of  Nebuchadrezzar's  guard,  was  sent  to  destroy  Jerusalem. 
The  Temple,  the  palace,  and  the  principal  houses,  were  burnt, 
the  walls  were  dismantled,  and  all  the  vessels  and  ornaments  of 
the  Temple  were  either  broken  in  pieces  or  carried  away.  Cer- 
tain leading  men,  some  seventy  in  all  (including  the  chief  priest 
Seraiah),  were  taken  to  Riblah,  and  there  put  to  death.  A  con- 
siderable body  of  the  remaining  citizens  was  then  led  into 
captivity  (apparently  in  more  than  one  draft,  see  Jer.  Hi.  30).^ 
Others  effected  their  escape  into  the  neighbouring  lands  of  Edom, 
Moab,  and  Ammon,  whose  people,  however,  though  they  had 
instigated  the  Jewish  king  to  rebel  against  Babylon,  could  not 
so  far  overcome  their  ancient  animosity  as  to  refrain  from 
triumphing  over  the  final  downfall  of  their  rival;  and  their 
rejoicings  gave  an  added  bitterness  to  Judah's  humiliation. 
Edom  in  particular,  alike  by  its  vindictive  joy  at  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  and  by  its  encroachments  upon  the  conquered 
territory,  earned  the  lasting  hatred  of  the  Jews  (see  Obad.  i.  foil., 

^  According  to  Jer.  Hi.  29,  in  Nebuchadrezzar's  eighteenth  year,  832,  in  his 
twenty-third  year,  745;  but  2  Kg.  xxv.  8  only  mentions  a  deportation  in 
Nebuchadrezzar's  nineteenth  year. 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  387 

Ezek.  XXV.  12-14,  XXXV.,  "/j."xxxiv.  5  foil.,  2  Is,  Ixiii.  1-6,  Ps. 
cxxxvii.  7).  As  governor  of  the  despoiled  country,  where  the 
poorer  population,  engaged  in  tillage,  was  suffered  to  stay,  Nebu- 
chadrezzar chose  a  native  Judaean  named  Gedaliah,  the  son  of 
Jeremiah's  protector  Ahikam.^  Jeremiah,  who  had  been  carried 
away  in  chains,  Hke  the  other  captives,  as  far  as  Ramah,  was 
there  set  at  liberty  by  the  direction  of  Nebuzaradan,  and  given 
his  option  either  of  proceeding  to  Babylon  or  of  remaining  in 
his  native  land.  He  chose  the  latter,  and  was  commended  to 
the  care  of  Gedaliah,  with  whom  he  took  up  his  abode  ijer 
xl.  i-6).2 

Thus  perished  the  last  surviving  branch  of  the  Hebrew  king- 
dom founded  by  Saul  and  consoHdated  by  David.  Able  as  both 
Israel  and  Judah  were  to  resist  the  aggressions  of  the  smaller 
Palestinian  states,  they  were  inevitably  crushed  as  soon  as  they 
were  brought  into  collision  with  the  great  empires  beyond  the 
Euphrates.  But  Judah,  sheltered  by  its  situation,  might  perhaps 
have  escaped  annihilation  by  refraining  from  defiance,  if  it  had 
not  been  for  Egypt.  The  strength  of  its  capital,  Jerusalem, 
made  it  unsafe  for  Nebuchadrezzar,  as  for  Sennacherib,^  to  leave 
it  unmolested  when  prosecuting  his  designs  against  the  Egyptians 
unless  assured  of  its  neutrality,  if  not  its  friendliness;  and  this 
the  Pharaoh  took  care  to  render  impossible.  Egypt  was  thus  the 
evil  genius  of  the  Hebrew  people  to  the  close  of  their  history  ; 
and  events  fully  justified  the  deep  distrust  which  both  Isaiah 
and  Jeremiah,  Uving  in  successive  centuries,  never  ceased  to 
entertain  of  it. 

Gedaliah's  seat  of  authority  was  at  Mizpah;  and  his  appoint- 
ment inspired  such  confidence  that  many  of  the  Jews  who  had 
fled  into  the  adjoining  countries  were  encouraged  to  return. 
Among  those  who  Hkewise  came  back,  but  with  a  sinister  pur- 
pose, was  a  certain  Ishmael,  son  of  Nethaniah,  a  man  of  royal 
descent,  who  had  been  an  officer  of  Zedekiah's,  and  after  his 
capture,  had   taken  refuge  with  Baalis,  the  king   of  Ammon. 

^  See  p.  382. 

^  A  slightly  different  account  is  given  in  c.  xxxix.  11-14,  where  it  is  repre- 
sented that  Jeremiah  was  released  from  prison  by  Nebuzaradan  immediately 
on  the  capture  of  the  city,  and  committed  at  once  to  the  care  of  Gedaliah. 

'  See  p.  371. 


388  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

By  Baalis  he  had  been  incited  to  murder  Gedaliah,  possibly 
because  the  latter,  or  his  father  Ahikam,  had  been  opposed,  like 
Jeremiah,  to  the  confederacy  which  the  Ammonites  had  wished 
king  Zedekiah  to  join  (see  Jer.  xxvii.  3).  Accordingly,  he, 
together  with  others,  came  to  Gedaliah,  and  were  urged  by  him 
to  settle  in  the  country.  They  pretended  to  acquiesce;  but 
their  design  had  become  known  to  one  Johanan,  and  he  dis- 
closed it  to  the  governor,  who,  however,  discredited  the  informa- 
tion. The  assassin,  who  had  a  band  of  ten  men  with  him,  thus 
found  no  difficulty  in  carrying  out  his  purpose,  which  he  accom- 
plished at  a  feast,  slaying  at  Mizpah  Gedaliah  and  all  his 
immediate  attendants,  both  Jews  and  Babylonians.  At  Mizpah 
the  sanctuary  of  Jehovah,  which  had  once  existed  there,  appears 
to  have  been  restored ;  and  a  body  of  eighty  men,  who  were 
coming  to  visit  it  from  Shiloh,  Shechem,  and  Samaria,  were  like- 
wise, from  some  motive  unexplained,  almost  all  butchered,  a  few 
only  saving  their  lives  by  revealing  some  hidden  stores  of  grain, 
oil,  and  honey.  Ishmael  then  made  prisoners  of  the  late  king's 
daughters,  and  some  others ;  and  with  them  proceeded  to  return 
to  Ammon.  On  the  way  the  party  was  overtaken  at  Gibeon  by 
a  body  of  forces  under  Johanan,  who  recovered  the  captives,  but 
Ishmael  himself,  attended  by  eight  men,  succeeded  in  effecting 
his  escape.  The  fear  lest  Nebuchadrezzar  would  at  once  take 
indiscriminate  vengeance  for  the  murder  of  his  officer  led  Johanan 
and  all  those  with  him  to  determine  to  retire  to  Egypt ;  but  before 
doing  sc,  they  asked  counsel  of  Jehovah  at  the  mouth  of  Jere- 
miah, professing  to  be  willing  to  abide  by  his  reply.  He  earnestly 
dissuaded  them,  protesting  that  they  would  be  safe  if  they 
remained  in  the  land,  but  if  they  went  to  Egypt,  would  be  over- 
whelmed in  the  ruin  destined  to  be  brought  upon  that  country 
by  the  Babylonian  king.  Johanan  and  his  companions,  however, 
refused  to  heed  his  words,  asserting  that  there  was  no  divine 
authority  behind  them ;  and  charging  him  with  desiring  to  deliver 
them  into  the  hands  of  the  Babylonians.  They  accordingly  pro- 
ceeded to  Egypt  and  carried  with  them  both  Jeremiah  and  his 
friend  Baruch.  By  this  time  Necho  had  been  succeeded  on  the 
throne  of  Egypt  by  Psammetichus  II.,  and  he  in  turn  by  Uah-ab-ra 
(Uahibri),  the  Pharaoh  Hophra  of  the  O.T.  and  the  Apries  of 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  3^9 

Greek  historians.  The  refugees  settled  first  at  Tahpanhes 
(Daphnae),  and  subsequently  became  dispersed  among  other 
Egyptian  cities,  such  as  Migdol  and  Memphis.  There  they 
practised  idolatrous  rites  in  honour  of  the  queen  of  heaven,^ 
which  called  forth  the  solemn  remonstrances  of  Jeremiah.  But 
to  his  assertion  that  their  disasters  were  due  to  their  devotion  to 
such  forbidden  worship  in  the  past,  they  retorted  that  it  was  only 
while  they  burnt  incense  to  the  queen  of  heaven  in  their  own 
land  that  they  had  enough  and  saw  no  evil,  whereas  since  they 
had  forsaken  her,  they  had  been  consumed  with  sword  and 
famine.  All  that  Jeremiah  could  reply  to  this  was  that  the 
Divine  judgment  would  eventually  overtake  them  in  the  land  of 
their  exile,  for  Jehovah  would  deliver  Hophra,  their  protector,  into 
the  hands  of  his  enemies.  After  this  a  veil  falls  over  the  life  of 
the  prophet  and  of  those  with  whom  he  dwelt,  and  his  end  can 
only  be  conjectured.     It  seems  probable  that  he  died  in  Egypt. 

The  Hebrew  people  were  now  divided  into  three  sections 
One  section  was  still  in  possession  of  its  native  soil,  the  remnant 
of  the  Ten  Tribes  (largely  intermingled  with  the  colonists  intro- 
duced into  the  country  by  the  Assyrian  monarchs)  occupying 
Samaria  and  its  neighbourhood,  whilst  the  rural  population  of 
Judah  (less  contaminated  than  the  survivors  of  Israel  by  a 
foreign  element)  retained  their  homes  in  the  south.  A  second 
section,  as  has  been  just  related,  had  taken  refuge  in  Egypt,  and 
there  formed  the  nucleus  of  the  colony  which  subsequently, 
through  the  LXX.  translation  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  exer- 
cised a  most  important  influence  over  their  fellow-countrymen. 
The  third  section  was  settled  in  Babylonia;  and  it  is  with 
its  fortunes  that  the  remainder  of  the  history  is  principally 
concerned. 

Of  the  condition  of  the  Jews  in  Babylon  but  little  explicit 
information  is  forthcoming.  That  they  were  not  at  the  outset 
enslaved,  but  enjoyed  considerable  freedom  is  apparent  from  the 
advice  tendered  to  them  by  the  prophet  Jeremiah  in  a  letter 
already  referred  to,  which  was  sent  by  him  from  Jerusalem,  before 
its  final  surrender,  to  those  who  had  accompanied  Jehoiachin 
*  Probably  Ishtar  (Ashtoreth). 


390  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

into  exile.  In  it  he  counselled  them  to  live  peaceably  in  the 
land  whither  they  had  been  carried  away,  to  build  houses, 
plant  gardens,  make  for  themselves  homes,  and  seek  the  peace 
of  the  conquering  nation  {Jer,  xxix.  4  foil.),  his  language  imply- 
ing that  the  attitude  of  their  rulers  towards  them  left  them  at 
liberty  to  pursue  their  ordinary  avocations,  if  they  were  disposed 
to  do  so.  There  is  evidence,  too,  that  such  advice  was  followed. 
The  exiles  threw  themselves  into  the  commercial  Hfe  of  Babylon, 
and  applied  themselves  to  the  acquisition  of  gain  (Ezek.  xxxiii. 
31);  they  became  possessed  of  servants  and  attendants  {Ez.  ii.  65); 
they  were  organised  under  the  rule  of  elders  {Ezek.  viii.  i,  xiv.  i); 
and  at  the  time  of  the  Return  (as  will  be  seen),  were  able  to  con- 
tribute considerable  sums  towards  the  restoration  of  the  Temple 
{Ez.  ii.  69,  cf.  Zech.  vi.  lo-ii).  In  the  lenient  treatment  ex- 
perienced by  the  people  at  large  the  captive  king  Jehoiachin 
eventually  shared;  for  after  a  capti\dty  of  some  thirty-six  years, 
he  was  released  from  the  prison,  to  which  he  had  been  at  first 
consigned,  by  Evil  Merodach,  the  successor  of  Nebuchadrezzar, 
and  received  from  him  an  allowance  until  his  death  {2  Kg, 
XXV.  27-30).  At  the  same  time  there  were  disturbing  agencies 
at  work  tending  to  unsettle  and  embitter  the  banished  people. 
Jeremiah,  in  the  letter  alluded  to  (xxix.  8-9,  cf.  xxvii.  16),  refers 
to  prophets  who  inspired  their  countrj'men  with  false  promises 
and  encouraged  them  to  expect  an  immediate  deliverance.  These 
were  so  indignant  at  Jeremiah's  counsel,  that  a  message  was  sent 
by  one  Shemaiah  to  the  priests  at  Jerusalem,  bidding  them  put 
the  prophet  in  the  stocks  and  in  shackles  {Jcr.  xxix.  24  foil.). 
Such  must  have  made  many  of  the  people  restless  and  im- 
patient subjects;  and  whilst  bringing  upon  themselves  a  cruel 
punishment  {sqq  Jer.  xxix.  22),  doubtless  rendered  the  condition 
of  others  worse  than  it  had  previously  been.  Moreover,  the 
captive  population  in  general  must  often  have  betrayed  their 
satisfaction  when  Babylon  suffered  from  invasions,  and  when 
these  were  attended  with  ill-success,  the  misery  of  those  who  had 
sympathised  with  the  invaders  could  not  fail  to  be  aggravated. 
The  language  of  some  of  the  writers  of  a  generation  later  than 
Jeremiah  implies  the  imposition  upon  the  exiles  of  hard  service 


ISRAEL   AND  JUDAH  391 

("/f."  xiv.  3)  and  the  infliction  of  much  cruelty  (2  Is.  xlvii.  6), 
which  probably  followed  upon  the  insubordination  which  they 
had  manifested.  The  pain  of  banishment  from  their  beloved 
land  was  further  increased  by  the  scornful  attitude  assumed 
towards  them  by  those  who  remained  in  Palestine,  who,  though 
the  dregs  of  the  nation,  and  sunk  in  idolatry  and  immorality 
{Ezek.  xxxiii.  24-26),  plumed  themselves  upon  being  the  favoured 
inheritors  of  their  ancestral  soil,  and  repeated  the  language  used 
in  the  time  of  Zedekiah  towards  those  who  had  shared  the  exile 
of  Jehoiachin  (see  Ezek.  xi.  15).  Disappointed  hopes,  unworthy 
taunts,  and  actual  suffering  must  have  reduced  numbers  to  a 
condition  of  despair  {Ezek.  xxxiii.  10,  2  Is.  xl.  27,  xlix.  14), 
which,  at  times,  vented  itself  upon  the  nobler  spirits  among  them 
who  counselled  resignation  and  faith.  It  is  evident,  too,  that 
upon  some  of  the  Jewish  community  the  seductions  of  the 
Babylonian  capital  had  their  effect  {Ezek.  xxxiii.  31,-2  Is.  Ixv.  11), 
and  that  those  who  upheld  a  higher  standard  of  religion  and 
morality  exposed  themselves  to  persecution  at  the  hands  of  their 
countrymen  {2  Is.  li.  7,  cf.  Ixvi.  5).  The  emotions  kindled  in 
many  of  the  exiles  by  their  various  trials  occasionally  found 
expression  and  relief  in  elegies  like  Lamentations ,  and  in  such 
psalms  as  Ixxix.,  Ixxx.  and  Ixxxix. 

Nevertheless  there  were  not  lacking  sources  of  consolation  and 
confidence.  The  anticipations  which  even  the  earlier  prophets 
had  entertained  that  the  overthrow  of  their  country  which  they 
had  foretold  would  be  followed  by  the  people's  restoration  to  the 
Divine  favour  ^  were  revived  by  the  prophets  who  had  witnessed 
the  actual  enactment  of  the  predicted  judgment.  Jeremiah, 
whilst  discouraging  his  countrymen  from  trusting  to  the  vain 
promises  of  an  imminent  deliverance  with  which  some  had 
flattered  them,  and  whilst  indicating  by  a  conventional  figure^ 
that  a  long  period  had  yet  to  elapse  before  their  release  would 
come,  yet  affirmed  most  positively  its  ultimate  realisation  {Jer, 

*  See  Mic.  ii.  12-3,  iv.  6-7. 

^  Seventy  years  {Jer.  xxv.  11,  cf.  2  Ch.  xxxvi.  21).  The  real  duration  of 
the  Captivity  was  sixty  years,  if  reckoned  from  Jehoiachin's  exile  in  596,  and 
only  fifty  if  calculated  from  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  in  586. 


392  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

XXV.  11-13,  xxix.  10).  At  a  later  date,  when  some  years  of  the 
Captivity  had  expired,  Ezekiel  confidently  described  in  vision 
the  sanctuary  where  Jehovah  once  more  purposed  to  dwell  for 
ever  in  the  midst  of  His  people  {Ezek.  xliii.  7).  And  as  the 
events  matured  which  heralded  the  accomplishment  of  these 
expectations,  the  prophet  whose  compositions  constitute  c.  xl.- 
Ixvi.  of  the  book  of  Isaiah^  addressed  to  his  countrymen  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah  utterances  calculated  to  raise  in  them  the 
highest  hopes  for  the  future.  There  were  thus  forces  at  work 
which  kept  alive  the  people's  trust  in  their  God  and  their  destiny, 
and  prevented  them  from  losing,  as  the  exiles  of  the  Northern 
Kingdom  had  lost,  their  sense  of  separateness  from  the  rest  of 
the  population  of  the  vast  empire  in  which  they  had  been  in- 
corporated. 

Among  the  results  following  the  suppression  of  the  indepen- 
dence of  the  Jewish  people  was  the  bestowal  of  increased  care 
and  attention  upon  the  collection  and  completion  of  the  records 
of  their  past  history,  with  all  its  numerous  lessons;  whilst  the 
cessation  of  the  Temple  services  rendered  it  necessary,  in  the 
event  of  their  ever  being  restored  to  their  home,  to  preserve  care- 
fully the  memory  of  the  traditional  ritual  associated  with  them. 
It  is  probable  that  during  this  period  many  of  the  historical 
narratives  contained  in  the  O.T.  assumed  their  present  form;  and 
that  the  Law,  which  had  insensibly  been  expanded  and  developed 
in  the  course  of  the  preceding  centuries,  now  began  to  be  sys- 
tematised  and  codified  (cf.  Introd.  pp.  7,  8).  This  work  brought 
into  existence  the  class  of  Scribes  (distinct  from  the  officials 
previously  attached  to  the  courts  of  the  kings),  who  devoted 
themselves  to  the  study  of  the  annals  and  legislation  of  their 
race,  and  became  the  editors,  copyists,  and  interpreters  of  the 
documents  concerned. 

Of  the  history  of  Babylon  during  the  period  covered  by  the 
Exile  a  brief  summary  will  suffice.  Nebuchadrezzar,  who,  after 
capturing  Jerusalem,  had  spent  many  years  in  besieging  Tyre 
(cf.  Ezek,  xxvi.-xxviii.,  xxix.  18)^  and  had  then  made  an  expedi- 

^  Tyre  appears  to  have  capitulated  on  honourable  terms ;  see  Maspero, 
op.  cit,,  p.  549. 


ISRAEL  AND  JUDAH  393 

tion  against  Egypt  (cf.  Ezek.  xxix.y/er.  xlvi.  14  foll.),^  was  suc- 
ceeded in  561  by  Evil  Merodacli.  The  latter,  who  liberated  from 
prison  the  Jewish  king  Jehoiachin  (2  Kg.  xxv.  27),  was  murdered 
in  560,  and  was  followed  on  the  throne  by  his  assassin  Nergal- 
sharezer  (Neriglissor)  (perhaps  the  prince  named  in  Jer.  xxxix.  3) ; 
and  he,  in  turn,  was  succeeded  by  Labashi-merodach,  a  young  boy, 
who  was  displaced  in  554  by  a  usurper  named  Nabunahid  (Nabo- 
nidus) ;  and  it  was  in  the  reign  of  the  last-mentioned  sovereign, 
an  inactive  and  incapable  monarch,  that  the  power  of  Babylon 
was  brought  to  an  end. 

Nabunahid,  at  the  outset  of  his  rule,  initiated  a  policy  by  which 
he  alienated  the  sympathies  of  many  of  his  subjects.  This  was 
the  removal  to  his  capital  of  the  images  of  the  various  gods  to 
whose  service  the  several  cities  of  Babylonia  were  devoted ;  and 
the  disaffection  which  such  a  course  of  action  created  bore  fruit 
when  the  country  was  attacked  by  an  invader.  This  was  Cjrrus 
(Kurush),  a  Persian  by  origin,  whose  immediate  ancestors,  as 
vassals  of  the  Assyrians,  had  aided  the  latter  in  their  wars  against 
Elam  and  made  themselves  kings  of  Anshan,  a  province  of  that 
country,  and  who  himself  became  its  ruler  in  558.  In  549  he 
vanquished  Astyages,  king  of  a  northern  race  which  had  con- 
quered and  become  united  with  the  Medes  (cf.  p.  379);  and 
before  546  he  had  also  brought  Persia  under  his  sway.  In  547 
he  attacked  Babylonia  unsuccessfully ;  but  in  538  he  invaded  the 
country  again,  defeated  Nabunahid,  and  captured  the  city  of 
Sippara.  The  Babylonian  king  retired  to  his  capital,  whither  he 
was  followed  by  Gobryas,  the  lieutenant  of  Cyrus  ;  and  to  him 
the  city  was  surrendered  without  resistance.  Nabunahid  himself 
was  taken,  but  no  mention  is  made  of  his  meeting  a  violent  death, 
though  his  son  Belshazzar  seems  to  have  been  slain  subsequently 
by  Gobryas.2  Babylon,  a  few  months  after  its  capitulation,  was 
entered  by  Cyrus,  who  thenceforward  claimed  to  be  "  king  of 
Babylonia."     The  new  ruler,  as  soon  as  he  was  firmly  seated  on 

*  According  to  Joseph  us  [^Ant.  x.  9,  7)  he  killed  Pharaoh  Hophra  (Apries) : 
but  Herodotus  (ii.  169)  represents  Apries  as  being  murdered  by  his  own 
subjects. 

'  See  the  inscription  quoted  in  Driver,  Dan.  pp.  xxix.-xxx. 


394  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  throne,  proceeded  to  reverse  the  policy  of  preceding  Baby- 
lonian kings  by  allowing  many  of  the  peoples  deported  by  them 
to  return  to  their  homes,  and  by  restoring  to  their  sanctuaries  the 
gods  whose  images  had  been  brought  by  Nabunahid  to  Babylon ; 
and  it  was  in  consequence  of  the  line  of  action  thus  adopted  that 
the  Jewish  exile  came  to  a  close. 

In  Dan.  c  v.,  it  is  represented  (contrary  to  the  evidence  of  contemporary 
inscriptions,  which  has  been  followed  above)  that  Babylon  was  taken  by  storm, 
and  that  Belshazzar,  who  is  described  as  its  last  king,  was  slain  in  the  attack ; 
whilst  the  conqueror  is  called  "Darius  the  Mede,"  Herodotus  (iii.  150-160) 
also  relates  that  the  city  was  taken  by  storm ;  but  it  has  been  supposed  that 
he  has  ascribed  to  Cyrus  the  investment  and  capture  that  the  city  really  under- 
went in  the  time  of  Darius  Hystaspis,  after  its  revolt  on  the  death  of  Pseudo- 
Smerdis, 


CHAPTER  XIII 

RELIGION  FROM  THE  ACCESSION  OF  SOLOMON 
TO  THE  CLOSE  OF  THE  EXILE 

THE  history  of  a  people  being  a  continuous  movement,  the 
lines  of  division  between  the  periods  into  which  it  may  be 
convenient  to  separate  it  are  necessarily  somewhat  arbitrary,  one 
age  displacing  another  insensibly  and  bringing  its  distinguishing 
characteristics  to  light  only  by  degrees.  Nevertheless,  the  reign 
of  Solomon  really  marks  with  some  precision  the  beginning  of 
a  new  phase  in  the  record  of  Hebrew  religion,  two  factors  then 
coming  into  existence  which  profoundly  influenced  after  times. 
One  of  these  was  the  entrance  of  Israel  into  a  wider  arena  of 
international  relations,  with  its  accompaniment  of  enlarged  know- 
ledge, more  complex  interests,  and  increased  temptations.  The 
position  among  the  peoples  of  the  Palestinian  sea-board  and 
adjoining  regions  to  which  the  military  successes  of  David  had 
raised  it  involved  it  in  political  connections  which,  in  view  of  the 
intimate  bond  between  a  community  and  the  deity  it  worshipped, 
could  not  leave  the  religion  of  the  nation  unaffected.  The 
perils  to  which  Israel's  faith  in  Jehovah  was  now  exposed  differed 
from  those  that  threatened  it  in  the  preceding  age.  During  the 
time  of  the  Judges  it  was  endangered  chiefly  by  the  open 
triumph  of  external  enemies,  and  the  consequent  prestige  which, 
in  the  thought  of  those  days,  attached  to  their  gods.  From  the 
weakness  long  inseparable  from  its  situation,  and  its  comparative 
lack  of  unity  and  cohesion,  the  Hebrew  people  ran  some  risk 
of  being  overwhelmed  by,  and  submerged  beneath,  the  rallying 
forces  of  the  Canaanites,  the  marauding  inroads  of  the  Arabs,  or 
the  organised  invasions  of  the  Philistines.  But  under  the 
monarchy  very  different  conditions  prevailed.     The  nation  had 

3^5 


396  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

been  secured,  at  least  for  a  time,  against  external  domination, 
and  the  dangers  that  now  menaced  it  came  as  much  from  peace- 
ful alliances  as  from  hostile  aggression.  The  ties  of  friendship 
contracted  with  foreign  peoples  involved  the  toleration  of  foreign 
rites  of  worship  and  a  willingness  to  countenance  their  introduc- 
tion into  the  land.  Moreover,  the  corrupting  influence  of  cults 
adopted  from  powerful  and  independent  neighbours  with  whom 
the  nation  stood  on  terms  of  amity  was  much  greater  than  that 
of  practices  prevalent  among  the  ill-disposed  and  conquered 
Canaanites.  Accordingly  the  prophets  of  Israel  who  had 
previously  devoted  themselves  to  inspiring  the  nation's  resistance 
against  its  enemies  now  began  to  assume  in  general  an  attitude 
of  criticism  towards  their  own  countrymen,  and,  in  particular, 
censured  any  policy  which  was  calculated  to  impair  the  people's 
allegiance  to  its  God.  At  the  same  time  the  more  extensive 
acquaintance  with  the  surrounding  world  and  the  larger  oppor- 
tunities for  observing  contemporary  history,  afforded  by  the  new 
situation  in  which  Israel  now  found  itself,  profoundly  influenced 
their  own  minds,  and  contributed  to  the  formation  of  those  views 
of  Jehovah's  character  and  purposes  which  are  manifested  in  their 
teaching.  The  second  factor  which  helped  to  control  the 
religious  development  of  the  people  was  the  erection  of  the 
Temple.  At  first,  indeed,  it  was  merely  the  sanctuary  of  the 
capital,  not  of  the  kingdom ;  it  was  pre-eminent  but  not  unique. 
Even  after  the  Disruption,  other  local  shrines  existed  beside  it. 
But  from  the  outset  it  was  bound,  by  reason  alike  of  its  position 
in  the  capital  and  the  splendour  of  its  structure,  to  attract  to  it 
the  thoughts  and  aspirations  of  religious  Israelites.  And  when 
after  the  secession  of  the  ten  tribes  the  territory  of  Solomon's 
dynasty  was  reduced  to  a  single  tribe,  the  sanctuary  he  had  built 
must  have  still  further  dwarfed  in  importance  all  other  seats 
of  worship  in  Judah.  Consequently,  when  the  practices  that 
prevailed  at  the  local  shrines  rendered  a  religious  reformation 
necessary,  the  existence  of  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  suggested 
the  lines  which  the  reformation  should  follow.  The  limitation, 
which  was  then  imposed,  of  public  worship  to  one  spot  materially 
modified  in  the  centuries  that  followed  both  the  religion  and  the 
fortunes  of  the  Jewish  people. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  397 

The  period  now  under  review  naturally  falls  into  four  sub- 
divisions, each  of  which  presents  certain  special  features,  and  is 
illustrated  by  the  lives  and  teaching  of  certain  prophets.  These, 
with  the  prophets  conspicuous  in  them,  are : — 

(i)  The  Age  of  the  Syrian  wars  and  the  alliance  with  Zidon — 
Ahijah,  Elijah,  Elisha. 

(2)  The  Age  of  Assyrian  supremacy — Amos,  Hosea,  Is.  i.- 
xxxix.  (with  omissions),  Micah. 

(3)  The  Age  of  Babylonian  supremacy — Nahum,  Zephaniah, 
Jer.  i.-xlix.,  Habakkuk,  Obadiah,  Ezekiel  i.-xxxix. 

(4)  The  Age  of  the  Exile — Ezek.  xl.-xlviii.,  "  Is."  xiii.  i-xiv. 
23,  xxxiv.-xxxv.,  xl.-lxvi.,  "Jer."  x.  1-16,  1.,  li.  1-58. 

I.  The  Age  of  the  Syrian  wars  and  the  alliance  with  Zidon. 

The  building  of  the  Temple,  as  has  been  said,  did  not  effect 
any  immediate  change  in  the  external  conditions  of  religious 
worship  in  Israel.  Though  the  new  sanctuary  acquired  special 
sanctity  by  the  removal  to  it  of  the  Ark,  and  though  its  situation 
in  the  capital  lent  to  it  a  dignity  which  no  other  could  command, 
it  did  not  extinguish  the  numerous  "  high  places,"  the  presence 
of  which  in  various  parts  of  the  country  has  been  noticed  in  the 
survey  of  the  preceding  period.  The  most  eminent  of  these  was 
at  Gibeon,  where  Solomon,  before  the  building  of  the  Temple,  is 
recorded  to  have  sacrificed.  The  practice  of  worshipping  at  "  high 
places  "  at  this  time  is  excused  by  the  writer  of  i  Kg.  (iii.  2)  on 
this  very  ground  that  the  Temple  had  not  yet  been  erected :  but 
the  historian  himself  attests  that  it  prevailed  throughout  the  reigns 
of  Solomon's  immediate  successors  on  the  throne  of  Judah, 
not  excepting  those  of  Asa  and  Jehoshaphat.  The  retention  of 
it  by  such  sovereigns  confirms  the  conclusion,  drawn  already 
from  what  is  known  of  preceding  usage,  that  it  was  regarded  as 
quite  legitimate,  and  that  the  centralisation  of  worship  at  a  single 
shrine  was  not  yet  recognised  as  a  religious  requirement.  In 
Northern  Israel  after  the  Disruption,  the  mention  by  the  prophets 
of  the  8th  century  of  "  high  places "  in  various  localities,  such 
as  Tabor,  Mizpah,  Shechem  {Hos.  v.  i,  vi.  9),  and  Gilgal  {Am. 
iv.  4)  attests  their  existence  not  only  for  contemporary  times  but 
for  the  age  preceding.      It   may   be  inferred,   too,   from    the 


398  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

reference  to  the  altar  of  Jehovah  on  Mount  Carmel  in  i  Kg. 
xviii.  30  that  that  hill  was  also  a  "  high  place  " ;  whilst  Elijah's 
allusion  in  xix.  10  to  Jehovah's  altars  (in  the  plural)  corroborates 
the  statements  of  the  prophets  just  adduced.^  In  both  of  the 
Hebrew  kingdoms  material  symbols  were  employed  in  associa- 
tion with  the  rites  conducted  at  the  "  high  places."  In  Judah  in 
the  reign  of  Rehoboam  pillars  and  Asherim  were  erected  at 
them,  in  connection  (it  can  scarcely  be  doubted)  with  the  worship 
of  Jehovah.  The  use  of  such,  however,  seems  to  have  been 
considered  to  be  contrary  to  the  principles  of  the  national 
religion,  and  they  were  destroyed  by  Asa  and  Jehoshaphat,  who 
also  suppressed  the  unchaste  practices  which  had  been  introduced 
in  imitation  of  Canaanite  usage.  In  Israel,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  employment  of  emblems  in  the  worship  of  Jehovah  was 
more  persistent,  as  the  emblems  themselves  were  more  elaborate, 
than  in  Judah.  One  of  the  first  measures  of  Jeroboam,  on 
obtaining  the  sovereignty  of  the  ten  tribes,  was  to  set  up  at 
Bethel  and  Dan  the  effigies  of  two  bull-calves,^  as  objects  of 
worship.  That  by  the  calves  Jehovah  was  signified  is  clear  not 
only  from  the  king's  statement  that  they  represented  the  God 
that  brought  Israel  out  of  Egypt  (7  Kg.  xii.  28),  but  from  the 
circumstances  under  which  they  were  made,  for  it  was  a  rival 
attraction  to  the  Temple  and  not  a  rival  religion  that  Jeroboam 
desired  to  establish.  The  fact  that  the  exile,  into  which  he  had 
been  driven  by  Solomon,  was  spent  in  Egypt  has  suggested  that 
the  idea  of  the  calf-worship  was  derived  from  that  country,  where 
the  Uving  bulls  Apis  and  Mnevis  were  adored.  But  the  calves 
of  Jeroboam  cannot  be  disconnected  from  the  golden  calf  con- 
structed by  Aaron,  of  which  they  were  presumably  an  imitation ; 
and  for  it  a  different  origin  has  been  shown  to  be  probable.^ 
Upon  the  constitution  of  the  Priesthood  little  light  is  thrown  by 
the  history  of  the  period;  and  it  seems  reasonable  to  suppose 
that  the  system  that   prevailed   previously   still   obtained.     At 

^  According  to  the  Moabite  Stone  vessels  of  Jehovah  were  captured  by 
Mesha  at  Nelx),  which  seems  to  imply  the  existence  of  a  sanctuary  there. 

-  In  Hos.  X.  5  and  by  Jos.  Ant.  viii.  8.  4  they  are  represented  a.%  feminine — 
perhaps  by  way  of  contempt.    They  are  masculine  in  Hos.  xiii.  2  and  elsewhere. 

»  See  p.  160. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  399 

Jerusalem  Abiathar  the  High  Priest  was  deposed  by  Solomon 
and  his  place  was  filled  by  the  appointment  of  Zadok ;  but  both 
alike  belonged  to  the  family  of  Aaron,  though  to  different 
branches.  Elsewhere  the  priests  were  probably  in  general  drawn 
from  the  tribe  of  Levi  without  any  distinction  being  made 
between  descendants  of  Aaron  and  others ;  in  i  Kg.  viii.  4  the 
distinction  which  is  implied  in  the  Hebrew  text  is  not  maintained 
in  the  LXX.  (B)  and  is  not  marked  in  the  parallel  passage  2  Ch. 
V.  5.  In  the  Northern  Kingdom,  indeed,  the  sacerdotal  office  was 
not  even  confined  to  Levites,  Jeroboam  selecting  priests  for  his 
sanctuaries  from  all  the  tribes  indiscriminately  (/  Kg.  xii.  31). 
Certain  others  of  the  characteristic  regulations  of  the  Priestly 
code  of  the  Pentateuch  find  equally  little  place  in  the  usage  of 
this  time.  Thus  Solomon,  on  the  occasion  of  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  dismissed  the  people  on  the  eighth  day  (i  Kg. 
viii.  66),  though  in  Lev.  xxiii.  36,  this  day  is  required  to  be  kept 
as  a  closing  festival,  and  a  solemn  convocation  is  appointed  for 
it.^  At  a  later  date  the  principle  involved  in  the  injunctions  of 
Num.  xviii.  4,  excluding  all  strangers  from  approach  to  the 
Mosaic  tabernacle  (cf.  Num.  xvii.  13),  was  not  observed  in  con- 
nection with  the  Temple,  into  which  soldiers,  consisting  in  part 
of  foreign  mercenaries,  were  brought  by  the  priest  Jehoiada  when 
Athaliah  was  dethroned  (2  Kg.  xi.  4  foil.).  These  facts,  so  far 
as  they  go,  favour  the  belief,  already  expressed,  that  the  dis- 
tinctive laws  of  the  Priestly  code  had  not  yet  been  formulated. 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  may  be  gathered  that  whilst  some 
of  the  features  in  the  religion  of  this  period  which  receive  the 
censure  of  the  O.T.  historian  were  really  infractions  of  acknow- 
ledged principles,  others  were  long-established  practices  which 
no  law  yet  existed  to  condemn.  And  even  in  the  case  of  pro- 
ceedings which  must  be  allowed  to  be  breaches  of  the  earliest 
code  of  laws  that  has  been  preserved,  it  was,  in  general,  the 
manner,  not  the  object,  of  worship  that  was  illicit.  But  at 
certain  intervals  within  this  time  there  really  occurred  an  intru- 
sion into  Israel  not  only  of  forbidden  religious  rites,  but  also  of 
an  alien  religious  faith.  The  marriage  alliances  which  Solomon 
formed  inevitably  familiarised  his  people  with  the  cults  of  the 

*  In  -?  Ch.  vii.  9  Solomon's  conduct  is  brought  into  agreen\ent  with  Leviticus, 


400  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

several  nationalities  to  which  his  wives  belonged.  His  queens 
with  their  retainers  were  allowed  to  erect  sanctuaries  to  the 
various  deities  to  which  they  offered  adoration,  such  as  Chemosh, 
Milcom,  Ashtoreth,  and  perhaps  others  :  and  under  such  con- 
ditions the  worship  of  these  divinities  could  scarcely  fail  to 
attract  votaries.  Amongst  the  prophets,  who,  as  has  been  seen, 
were  even  in  David's  time  outspoken  censors  of  the  sovereign's 
errors,  this  departure  from  the  loyalty  due  to  Jehovah  must  have 
occasioned  deep  indignation.  To  Ahijah,  Shemaiah  and  their 
contemporaries  the  gods  worshipped  by  Solomon's  wives  were 
doubtless  no  non-entities,  but  Jehovah's  active  rivals,  for  Hebrew 
prophetic  thought  probably  had  not  attained  yet  to  a  belief  in 
Jehovah's  sole  existence.  And  that  He  had  an  exclusive  claim 
to  Israel's  service  and  devotion  had  long  been  the  prophets' 
traditional  creed ;  and  consequently  the  admission  of  other 
powers  to  a  share  in  the  people's  homage  was  a  lessening  of  His 
rights  and  prerogatives.  But  there  was  also  involved  a  real 
danger  to  the  national  character;  for  the  worship  of  the  Zidonian 
Ashtoreth,  at  least,  was  (it  can  scarcely  be  questioned)  of  a 
demoralising  nature.  Under  such  circumstances  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  Jeroboam  in  his  successful  attempt  to  detach  the 
northern  tribes  from  Solomon's  successor  had  the  sympathy 
and  support  of  certain  of  the  prophets,  though  the  variant 
versions  of  his  insurrection  given  by  the  Hebrew  and  the  LXX.^ 
render  it  difficult  to  determine  alike  the  actors  and  the  incidents 
in  the  preliminary  stages  of  the  conspiracy. 

It  was  not,  however,  until  a  later  date  that  the  religion  of  the 
Zidonian  Baal  and  Ashtoreth  threatened  to  dispute  actual  supre- 
macy with  that  of  Jehovah  within  the  limits  of  Israel.  The 
union  of  Ahab  with  the  Zidonian  princess  Jezebel  was  the  event 
which  revived  in  an  acute  form  the  dangers  which  had  menaced 
the  country  in  the  later  years  of  Solomon.  Jezebel,  an  imperious 
and  masterful  character,  was  not  disposed  to  submit  patiently  to 
the  opposition  which  the  practice  of  her  religion  met  with  at 
the  hands  of  the  prophets  of  Jehovah.  As  has  been  observed 
previously,  it  is  not  probable  that  there  was  anything  like  a 
general  proscription  of  the  worshippers  of  Jehovah.     The  fact 

»  See  pp.  308-9,  313-4. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  401 

that  the  syllables  JAH  and  JO  were  constituents  of  the  names 
of  certain  of  Ahab's  children,  and  the  attendance  at  his  court, 
before  his  fatal  expedition  to  Ramoth  Gilead,  of  numerous  pro- 
phets of  Jehovah,  are  sufficient  to  show  that  the  religion  of 
Jehovah  was  not  suppressed.^  But  it  was  characteristic  of  the 
true  votaries  of  the  God  of  Israel  that  they  would  not  brook 
for  Him  a  divided  allegiance.  Consequently  their  attitude  of 
antagonism  provoked  persecution ;  which  issued  in  the  struggle 
(recounted  in  the  last  chapter)  of  Elijah  and  Elisha  with  the 
house  of  Ahab,  and  the  final  destruction  of  Ahab's  family  by 
Jehu.  Under  the  rule  of  Jehu  and  his  dynasty  the  nation 
reverted  to  its  traditional  faith  and  to  the  mode  of  worship 
inaugurated  by  Jeroboam.  The  infection  of  Baal-worship  had 
previously  spread  to  Judah  in  consequence  of  the  marriage  of 
Jehoram  with  Ahab's  daughter  Athaliah ;  and  though  Athaliah's 
son  Ahaziah  fell,  like  his  uncle  Jehoram  (son  of  Ahab),  before 
Jehu,  the  religion  which  Athaliah  protected  and  fostered  main- 
tained its  ground  a  few  years  longer  as  the  result  of  her 
usurpation  of  the  crown.  When  she  was  overthrown,  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  was  restored  in  Judah,  as  in  Israel,  to  its 
former  predominance.  The  measures  taken  for  the  purification 
and  repair  of  the  Temple  in  the  reign  of  Joash  indicate  that 
that  sanctuary  became  once  more  the  object  of  national  interest 
and  care ;  but  notwithstanding  this,  the  historian  notices  that  the 
"high  places"  were  still  retained  in  the  reign  of  Amaziah,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Joash;  and  there  was  as  yet  no  movement  in  the  direction 
of  making  Jerusalem  the  sole  seat  of  national  devotion. 

In  the  accounts  of  the  conflict  between  the  religions  of  Jehovah 
and  Baal  in  which  Elijah  figures  so  prominently,  there  is  nothing 
to  prove  that  that  prophet  any  more  than  his  predecessors  had 
arrived  at  a  complete  monotheistic  faith.  He  and  his  contem- 
poraries were,  no  doubt,  tending  towards  such;  and  it  has  been 
urged  that  Elijah's  mocking  language  on  Carmel  respecting  Baal 
{j  Kg.  xviii.  27)  is  practically  inconsistent  with  a  belief  in  Baal's 
real  existence.  But  the  message  which  he  sent  to  Ahaziah  of 
Israel  on  the  occasion  of  the  latter's  enquiring  of  the  oracle  of 
Baal-zebub  at  Ekron  shows  no  consciousness  of  the  king's  folly 

*  Cf.  p.  335. 
2  D 


402  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

in  seeking  information  of  an  imaginary  god,  but  only  of  his  dis- 
trust of  Jehovah  and  his  confidence  in  an  alien  deity.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  absence  of  any  protest  on  the  part  of  the  prophet 
against  the  calf-worship  that  prevailed  in  Northern  Israel  cannot 
be  regarded  under  the  circumstances  as  a  sufficient  indication  that 
he  saw  nothing  objectionable  in  it,  or  entertained  an  unspiritual 
conception  of  Jehovah.  Where  the  supremacy  of  Israel's  ancestral 
religion  was  at  stake,  the  purification  of  it  from  corruptions  might 
well  seem,  for  the  time,  to  be  of  secondary  importance. 

In  connection  with  the  conditions  of  prophecy  in  this  period, 
some  of  the  features  observed  in  the  preceding  period  still 
obtained.  A  state  of  ecstasy  was  sometimes  artificially  stimulated 
by  means  of  music,  as  was  done  by  Elisha  when  accompanying 
Jehoram  and  Jehoshaphat  on  their  invasion  of  Moab  {2  Kg. 
iii.  15,  cf.  I  Sam.  x.  5).  The  same  prophet  is  found,  Hke  Samuel 
at  Ramah  {i  Sam.  xix.  20),  in  company  with  certain  bodies  of 
young  men,  known  as  sons  of  the  prophets.  These  bodies,  which 
have  been  compared  with  the  mediaeval  "  guilds,"  seem  to  have 
consisted  of  youths  who  were  organised  and  trained  by  the  lead- 
ing prophets  to  serve  as  their  ministers  and  envoys,  being  in- 
structed presumably  in  music,  oratory,  and  the  historical  traditions 
of  their  race,  besides  being  grounded  in  the  national  faith. 
Doubtless  eventually  they  lost  much  of  the  fanaticism  which 
prevailed  in  an  earlier  age,  though  a  certain  wildness  of  bearing 
continued  to  mark  them  even  in  the  days  of  Elisha  {2  Kg. 
ix.  I,  11).  In  process  of  time  the  prophets  became  the  recog- 
nised exponents  of  the  Divine  purposes,  oracles  being  sought 
from  them  in  place  of  being  obtained  by  the  priestly  Ephod  and 
Uri7n  and  Thum7nim?-  This  substitution  of  the  human  spirit  for 
the  hazard  of  a  die  (or  something  similar)  in  the  interpretation  of 
Jehovah's  counsels  was  an  advance  of  no  slight  magnitude. 
Revelation  now  had  in  the  human  mind  and  character  its  fitting 
channel;  and  there  was  at  once  rendered  possible  a  progress  in 
the  comprehension  of,  and  insight  into,  the  nature  of  God  and 
His  relations  with  His  people,  which  becomes  increasingly 
apparent  in  the  periods  that  succeed. 

^  The  two  classes  of  priests  and  prophets  were  not  mutually  exclusive,  the 
prophets  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  being  likewise  priests. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  403 

2.  The  Age  of  Asssnrian  Supremacy. 

Northern  Israel  had  relations  with  Assyria  as  early  as  the  time 
of  Jehu ;  but  it  did  not,  so  far  as  can  be  judged,  come  under  the 
influence  of  Assyrian  religion  until  the  reigns  of  Jehu's  successors. 
The  earliest  indication  of  the  spread  in  Israel  of  distinctively 
Assyrian  cults  occurs  in  Amos  (who  wrote  in  the  reign  of  Jero- 
boam II.),  where  allusion  is  made  to  the  worship  of  Siccuth  or 
Saccuth  and  of  Chiun  or  Kaiwan  {Am.  v.  26).  The  first  of  these 
is  an  appellation  of  the  god  Adar,  the  Assyrian  deity  of  war  and 
fire ;  whilst  the  second  is  the  name  of  the  planet  Saturn,  and  the 
mention  of  the  latter  points  to  the  prevalence  in  Israel  of  star- 
worship.  The  adoration  of  the  "  host  of  heaven "  during  the 
closing  years  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  is  further  attested  by 
the  historian  of  2  Kg.  (xvii.  16).  Judah  was  perhaps  infected 
by  Assyrian  forms  of  worship  shortly  afterwards ;  for  when  Ahaz 
the  contemporary  of  Pekah  submitted  to  Tiglath  Pileser  and 
was  summoned  to  Damascus,  he  brought  back  with  him  the  copy 
of  an  altar  seen  there,  which  was  probably  Assyrian  rather 
than  Syrian  (as  stated  by  the  historian)  in  character  {2  Kg.  xvi. 
10-15).  This  suggests  that  he  introduced  an  Assyrian  cult 
amongst  his  people,  conceiving  the  deities  of  Assyria  to  be  powers 
whom  it  was  expedient  to  propitiate.  The  same  king  is  also  the 
first  who  is  described  as  having  caused  his  son  to  pass  through 
the  fire  {2  Kg.  xvi.  3).  Yet  in  neither  Judah  nor  Israel  was 
the  worship  of  Jehovah  altogether  replaced  by  that  of  other 
deities.  The  recognition  by  Ahaz  of  Jehovah  as  the  national 
God  is  evidenced  by  the  name  which  Ahaz  gave  to  his  son 
(Hezekiah),  whilst  the  Divine  name  appears  as  an  element  in 
the  appellation  of  the  Israelite  kings  Jehoahaz,  Joash,  Zechariah, 
and  Pekahiah.  In  Israel  the  calves  set  up  by  Jeroboam  as 
emblems  of  Jehovah  still  received  adoration  {Hos.  xiii.  2).  And 
it  is  apparent  from  the  writings  of  the  prophets  that  amongst  the 
populace  there  prevailed  a  confident  belief  that  Jehovah  would 
intervene,  as  before  in  their  history,  to  save  them  from  all  disaster, 
and  a  hopeful  desire  was  expressed  to  see  the  day  of  Jehovah 
(Am.  V.  18).  There  was,  in  short,  notwithstanding  the  inroads 
of  foreign  rites  and  usages,  much  formal  maintenance  of  the 


404  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

people's  traditional  religion.  But  this  formal  service  was 
accompanied  by  widespread  social  corruption.  The  external 
prosperity  which  Israel  and  Judah  enjoyed  during  the  rule  of 
Jeroboam  II.  and  Uzziah  respectively  was  attended  by  many 
internal  disorders.  There  was  a  growing  separation  of  class  from 
class.  The  luxury  of  the  rich  contrasted  glaringly  with  the 
poverty  of  the  poor.  Landed  property  was  becoming  con- 
centrated in  a  few  hands ;  and  the  expropriation  of  the  smaller 
by  the  greater  landowners  appears  to  have  been  marked  by 
harshness  and  cruelty.  Justice  was  wrested  in  the  interest  of 
the  powerful ;  robbery  and  murder  were  rife ;  and  the  priesthood 
(at  least  in  Israel),  instead  of  being  foremost  in  stemming  the 
tide  of  wickedness,  seems  to  have  been  as  guilty  as  any  other 
order  in  the  community. 

In  Judah,  where  Ahaz,  the  grandson  of  Uzziah,  was  succeeded 
by  Hezekiah,  an  attempt  at  reformation  was  made  (if  the  state- 
ments of  the  writer  of  2  Kg.  may  be  trusted),  which  aimed  not 
only  at  the  destruction  of  existing  idolatrous  emblems,  but  at  the 
prevention  of  further  innovations  in  the  future.  Hezekiah, 
besides  breaking  in  pieces  the  pillars  and  Asherim^  and  even 
the  brazen  serpent  described  as  having  been  made  by  Moses 
in  the  wilderness,  likewise  abolished  the  "  high  places " 
(2  Kg.  xviii.  4,  22).  The  principal  reason  that  made  the 
abolition  of  these  desirable  was  the  facility  with  which  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  conducted  at  them  could  be  contaminated 
by  foreign  elements.  As  has  been  said,  the  popular  conception 
of  Jehovah  was  not  very  remote  from  that  entertained  of  the 
Canaanite  deities;  and  titles  like  Baal  and  Melech  could  be, 
and  were,  applied  as  well  to  the  God  of  Israel  as  to  the  gods 
of  Peor  or  Zidon.  Under  such  circumstances  the  deterioration 
of  both  faith  and  practice  must  have  always  been  easy;  and  it  was 
doubtless  furthered  in  the  country  districts  by  the  concentration 
at  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  of  the  most  influential  and  best- 
instructed  priests,  the  care  of  the  local  sanctuaries  being  left 
to  the  more  ignorant  members  of  the  sacerdotal  body.  The 
attempted  reformation,  however,  seems  to  have  been  only  partially 
successful ;  and  even  idol-worship  does  not  appear  to  have  been 
wholly  extirpated  {Is.  xxx.  22,  xxxi.  7).     If  the  account  given 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  405 

be  historical  in  all  its  details,  and  the  earliest  restriction  of 
worship  to  Jerusalem  be  rightly  assigned  to  the  beginning 
of  Hezekiah's  reign,  it  may  have  been  first  suggested  by  the 
temporary  suspension  of  local  services  under  pressure  of  the 
inroad  made  by  Pekah  and  Rezin  in  the  time  of  Ahaz ;  whilst 
those  who  reject  the  statements  of  2  Kg.  consider  that  the  idea 
first  arose  in  consequence  of  the  preservation  of  the  capital  from 
the  destruction  which  overtook  the  provincial  towns  during  the 
invasion  of  Sennacherib.  The  latter  event,  if  it  did  not  originate 
the  reform,  must  at  any  rate  have  greatly  promoted  it  when 
subsequently,  after  the  idolatrous  reaction  under  Manasseh,  the 
centralisation  of  worship  was  again  attempted  by  Josiah. 

It  is  to  the  period  of  Assyrian  supremacy  that  the  earliest 
written  prophecies  that  have  been  preserved  as  independent  com- 
positions belong.  The  existence  of  such  written  prophecies  is  a 
fact  as  important  for  the  comprehension  of  the  Hebrew  religion  at 
large  as  it  is  for  the  history  of  the  particular  centuries  that  pro- 
duced them.  The  prophetical  writings  not  only  throw  incidental 
light  upon  the  condition  of  contemporary  times,  and  enable  the 
development  of  religious  thought  in  Israel  from  this  date  onward 
to  be  traced  much  more  extensively  and  accurately  than  is  prac- 
ticable at  any  preceding  stage,  but  they  make  it  possible  for  the 
character,  purposes,  and  methods  of  prophecy  in  general  to  be 
studied  at  first  hand.  Under  these  circumstances,  it  will  be 
desirable,  before  proceeding  to  mark  the  progress  in  moral  and 
religious  ideas  effected  in  the  successive  ages  into  which  this 
period  has  previously  been  divided,  to  consider  briefly  the  pro- 
phetic office  as  understood  by  the  prophets  themselves,  and  the 
convictions  which  animated  them  in  their  exercise  of  it. 

By  this  time  the  earUer  conception  of  the  prophets  as  seers 
and  diviners,  to  be  consulted  in  moments  of  difficulty  or  un- 
certainty, had  almost  disappeared.  Application  was,  indeed, 
occasionally  made  to  them  by  persons  in  doubt  as  to  a  course 
to  be  taken  or  an  issue  to  be  expected  {Is,  xxxvii.  2,/er.  xxxviii. 
14,  xlii.  2,  3);  but  they  were,  for  the  most  part,  asserters,  in 
season  and  out  of  season,  of  the  religious  truths  which  they 
believed  the  nation  especially  to  need,  and  which  they  considered 
themselves  to  be  divinely  instructed  to  proclaim.     Their  object 


4o6  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

was  to  interpret  Jehovah's  will  and  Jehovah's  ways  to  His  people, 
to  expound  the  principles  and  aims  of  His  Providence,  and  to 
explain  His  nature,  attributes,  and  character.  This  object  they 
pursued  not  in  philosophic  abstraction,  but  with  close  reference 
to  those  events  of  physical  and  human  history  which  excited 
attention  and  demanded  elucidation.  Ignoring  secondary  causes, 
they  assigned  all  that  happened  to  the  direct  agency  of  God ;  and 
traced  in  the  fortunes  of  their  nation  and  of  the  world  in  general 
the  accomplishment  of  a  moral  purpose.  They  were  thus  primarily 
preachers  of  righteousness  (cf.  Mic.  iii.  8),  and  defenders  of  true 
religion.  Their  utterances  were  evoked  by  the  conditions  which 
immediately  confronted  them ;  and  the  tenor  of  their  prophecies 
varied  with  the  circumstances  and  requirements  of  the  times. 
Their  message  was  addressed  directly  to  their  contemporaries, 
whose  conduct  they  sought  to  influence  and  determine  in  con- 
formity with  the  Divine  Laws;  and  with  this  end  in  view  they 
warned  (cf.  Ezek.  xxxiii.  7),  reproved,  corrected,  fortified,  or  con- 
soled. Their  predominant  note,  indeed,  was  one  of  censure 
and  rebuke.  They  castigated  the  nation's  sins  and  foUies,  and 
denounced  equally  social  corruption  and  religious  formalism. 
But  on  occasions  their  tone  was  one  of  hope  and  encouragement ; 
and  when  the  country  was  suffering  under  stress  of  disaster, 
whether  from  physical  calamities,  such  as  drought  and  famine,  or 
from  the  inroads  of  foreign  invaders,  they  seldom  failed,  whilst 
insisting  on  the  punitive  character  of  the  affliction,  to  hold  out 
to  their  countrymen,  if  repentant,  the  prospect  of  relief.  As  will 
be  seen  later,  even  in  the  hour  of  Israel's  extinction  as  a  nation 
there  was  not  wanting  the  voice  of  prophecy  to  predict  the 
restoration  of  a  reformed  and  forgiven  people. 

In  enforcing  the  lessons  which  they  wished  to  convey,  the 
prophets  exhausted  all  the  devices  of  oratory.  From  the  days  of 
Moses,  their  language  abounded  in  figure  and  metaphor  (see 
Ex,  iv.  22),  and  Nathan  on  a  well-known  occasion  used  a  touch- 
ing parable  to  rouse  David  to  a  true  sense  of  his  sin  {2  Sam,  xii.  i 
foil.).  In  the  prophetic  writings  of  the  8th  and  succeeding 
centuries,  the  relations  of  Israel  with  its  God  are  represented 
under  every  variety  of  similitude;^  indeed,  to  such  an  extent  is 

1  Cf.  Hoi.  xii.  10. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  407 

figurative  speech  employed  by  them  that  Ezekiel  pleads  that  the 
people  made  it  a  reproach  against  him  that  he  was  a  speaker  of 
parables  {Ezek.  xx.  49).  For  instance,  Israel,  or  Jerusalem,  is 
styled  a  virgin,  exposed  to  maltreatment  by  enemies  {Am.  v.  2, 
Is.  xxxvii.  22).  Or  she  is  Jehovah's  bride,  and  her  worship  of 
other  gods  is  consequently  whoredom  and  adultery  {Hos.  ii.  2, 
7,  \%Jer.  ii.  2,  iii.  i,  9,  Ezek.  c.  xvL,  2  Is.  1.  i,  Hv.  5-6).  Again, 
Israel  is  Jehovah's  son  whom  He  taught  to  go,  or  carried  in  His 
arms  {Hos.  xi.  i,  cf.  Jer.  xxxi.  9).  Or  else  it  is  Jehovah's  vine- 
yard {Is.  V.  7),  or  His  vine  {Jer.  ii.  21,  Ezek.  xix.  10,  cf.  xv.  6),  or 
a  goodly  olive  tree  {Jer.  xi.  16).  The  nation  is  also  compared 
to  a  flock  of  sheep  {^^  Zech^^  ix.  16,  Ezek.  xxxiv.  31),  whose  shep- 
herds are  the  prophets;  or  to  a  Honess  {Ezek.  xix.  2)  whose 
whelps,  her  kings,  are  trapped  and  caged.  Even  Jehovah  Him- 
self is  likened  to  a  lion  {Hos.  xi.  10),  or  to  a  bird  protecting  its 
young  {Is.  xxxi.  5).  In  Daniel  (c.  vii.,  viii.)  the  successive  empires 
which  dominated  the  eastern  world  from  the  6th  to  the  2nd  cen- 
tury are  represented  under  various  animal  forms,  some  of  them 
being  of  strangely  composite  character.  The  use  of  significant 
names  was  common  in  Israel,  as  in  other  Eastern  nations ;  and 
the  prophets  often  allude  to  such  as  conveyed  a  warning  or  a 
promise  {Hos.  i.  6,  9,  ii.  22,  Is.  vii.  3,  viii.  i,  cf  viii.  18).  Plays 
upon  words  are  frequent,  as  when  an  almond  tree  {shaked)  suggests 
that  Jehovah  is  watching  {shoked)  over  His  word  to  perform  it 
{Jer.  i.  11-12,  others  are  observable  in  the  Hebrew  of  Am. 
viii.  2,  Mic.  \.  10,  14,  15).  A  device  often  employed  by  the 
prophets  for  attracting  attention  and  impressing  their  communi- 
cations upon  the  minds  of  observers  was  the  use  of  symbolic 
actions.  In  earlier  times,  the  accidental  rending  of  Samuel's  robe 
by  Saul  was  interpreted  by  the  prophet  to  indicate  the  rending 
from  Saul  of  the  kingdom ;  whilst  Ahijah  or  Shemaiah  intentionally 
tore  the  garment  he  was  wearing  into  twelve  pieces,  of  which  he 
gave  ten  to  Jeroboam  to  symbolise  the  partition  of  the  kingdom 
of  Solomon  {i  Sam.  xv.  27-28,  i  Kg.  xi.  29-31 ;  cf  also  i  Kg.  xx. 
35,  xxii.  11).  Of  the  later  prophets,  Isaiah,  to  discourage  reliance 
upon  Egypt,  walked  naked  and  barefoot  for  three  years  as  a  sign 
that  the  Egyptians  and  Ethiopians  would  be  led  away  captive, 
naked  and  barefoot,  by  the  king  of  Assyria  {Is.  xx,  2  foil.)     The 


4o8  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

writer  of  a  section  preserved  in  Zechariah  took  two  staves,  emblems 
of  the  two  Israelite  kingdoms,  and  broke  them,  to  symbolise  the 
breaking  of  brotherhood  between  Israel  and  Judah  {"Zech.^^  xi. 
7,  lo,  14).  Jeremiah,  on  one  occasion,  brought  an  earthen  vessel 
and  shattered  it  before  the  people  to  indicate  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  {Jer.  xix.  1-13);  and  on  another  occasion,  he  placed 
bands  and  bars  upon  his  neck,  and  then  sent  them  to  the  kings 
of  Edom  and  Moab  and  their  allies  (who  were  seeking  to  induce 
Zedekiah  to  rebel  against  Nebuchadrezzar)  with  the  announce- 
ment that  the  Babylonian  yoke  would  be  laid  upon  all  those 
countries  {Jer.  c.  xxvii.).  Similarly  Ezekiel  removed  all  his  stuff 
out  of  his  house  as  a  token  of  the  coming  exile  {Ezek.  c.  xii.) ; 
and  shaved  his  head  and  destroyed  the  hairs,  with  the  exception 
of  a  few,  to  illustrate  the  fate  in  store  for  the  nation  {Ezek.  c.  v.). 
In  Jeraniah  and  Ezekiel  such  symbolic  acts  are  exceptionally 
common ;  further  instances  occur  in  Jer.  c.  xiii.,  xliii.  9-10, 
Ezek.  iv.  4  foll.,^  xxxvii.   15  foil. 

The  prophets  in  the  discharge  of  their  office  always  regarded 
themselves  as  the  mouthpieces  of  Jehovah  {Jer.  xv.  19),  and 
ascribed  their  utterances  to  the  Deity  Himself  {Jer.  i.  9;  cf. 
Detit.  xviii.  18).  They  believed  themselves  to  be  in  His  con- 
fidence {Am.  iii.  7),  to  be  commissioned  by  Him,  and  to  be 
endowed  with  His  Spirit  {Mic.  iii.  8,  2  Is.  xlviii.  16,  Zeck.  vii.  12), 
even  identifying  themselves  so  far  with  Him  that  despite  done  to 
the  prophet  was  despite  done  to  God  {"Zech."  xi.  12-13,  c^-  xii.  10). 
They  were  His  instruments  in  shaping  the  destinies  of  mankind, 
in  the  sense  that  their  words  were  the  heralds  of  the  Divine 
operations :  by  them  Jehovah  hewed  His  people  {Nos.  vi.  5),  and 
by  Him  they  were  set  "to  pluck  up  and  to  break  down,  to  destroy 
and  to  build  up"  (Jer.  I  10,  cf.  v.  14).  The  usual  preface  to 
their  addresses  is  simply  Thus  saith  Jehovah;  but  sometimes 
they  indicate  under  various  figures  a  sensible  mastery  of  them- 
selves by  the  Divine  Spirit.     Thus  Ezekiel  declares  (iii.  22)  "the 

^  In  Ezek.  iv.  5,  9  for  three  hundred  and  ninety  there  should  probably  be 
read,  with  the  LXX. ,  one  hundred  and  ninety,  which  approximately  represents 
the  period  between  the  Fall  of  Samaria  in  722  and  the  (ideal)  restoration  of 
both  Israel  and  Judah  in  536. 

It  is  possible  that  some  of  the  symbolic  acts  attributed  to  the  prophets  were 
only  described  and  not  performed,  as  must  obviously  have  been  the  case  with 
that  related  in/er.  xxv.  15-17. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  409 

hand  of  Jehovah  was  upon  me,  and  He  said  unto  me,  Arise"; 
and  the  movements  of  his  mind  are  represented  as  directed  by 
"the  Spirit"  (iii.  14,  24),  whose  influence  is  described  under 
physical  symbols  (see  especially  viii.  3,  "  he  put  forth  the  form  of 
a  hand  and  took  me  by  a  lock  of  mine  head").  The  same 
prophet  further  speaks  of  "eating  a  roll "  which  a  hand  presented 
unto  him,  wherein  were  written  lamentations  and  mourning  and 
woe  (iii.  2).  Jeremiah  similarly  relates  that  Jehovah  put  forth 
His  hand  and  touched  his  mouth ;  and  like  Ezekiel  declares  that 
he  "did  eat"  Jehovah's  words.  Isaiah  (vi.  i),  Zechariah  (i.  7), 
and  others,  indicate  more  or  less  exactly  the  time  when  the 
Divine  revelations  were  imparted.  And  though  Divine  com- 
munications were  sometimes  sought  in  prayer  {Jer.  xlii.  4,  cf. 
xxxiii.  3),  it  is  often  implied  that  it  was  with  great  unwillingness 
and  self-distrust  that  Jehovah's  message  was  received.  Jeremiah 
(i.  6),  for  instance,  represents  himself  as  pleading  to  Jehovah,  Who 
had  appointed  him  to  be  a  prophet  unto  the  nations,  that  he 
could  not  speak,  for  he  was  a  child;  and  a  similar  shrinking 
from  a  prophet's  commission  is  suggested  in  Jehovah's  address 
to  Ezekiel  (ii.  8),  "Be  not  thou  rebellious  like  that  rebellious 
house."  But  the  strong  repugnance  to  undertake  the  duties 
laid  upon  them  was  overmastered  by  a  still  stronger  force ;  for 
Jeremiah,  in  answer  to  his  plea,  received  the  reply,  "Say  not,  I 
am  a  child,  for  to  whomsoever  I  shall  send  thee  thou  shalt  go  " ; 
and  on  another  occasion  he  declared,  "  If  I  say,  I  will  not  make 
mention  of  Him,  nor  speak  any  more  in  His  name,  then  there  is 
in  mine  heart  as  it  were  a  burning  lire,  shut  up  in  my  bones,  and 
I  am  weary  with  forbearing,  and  I  cannot  contain  "  (xx.  9).  The 
prophets  thus  appear  as  compelled  to  speak  in  virtue  of  a  con- 
straining power  which  was  so  far  not  themselves  that  it  led  them 
into  perils  from  which  they  would  otherwise  have  shrunk  (see 
Jer.  xi.  19,  XV.  10),  in  spite  of  their  prevailing  consciousness  of 
being  under  Divine  protection  (Jer.  i.  8,  xv.  11).  A  further 
indication  of  the  distinction  which  they  drew  between  the  duties 
imposed  upon  them  by  the  Deity  and  the  course  which  their  own 
reflection  incHned  them  to  adopt  is  furnished  h^  Jer.  xxxii.  6-25. 
The  prophet  believed  himself  forewarned  by  God  that  his  uncle 
would  offer  him  his  field  for  sale ;  and  as  the  offer  was  afterwards 


410  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

actually  made,  he  concluded  that  it  was  the  Divine  will  that  he 
should  accept  it,  and  accordingly  did  so.  But  the  land  at  the 
time  was  menaced  by  the  Babylonians  who,  Jeremiah  was  per- 
suaded, would  become  masters  of  it ;  and  consequently  the 
prophet,  in  effecting  the  purchase,  did  what  prudential  considera- 
tions altogether  condemned. 

Another  fact  suggestive  of  an  external  influence  in  the  Divine 
communications  made  to  the  prophets,  namely  their  reported 
witnessing  of  visions,  is  of  a  more  inconclusive  nature.  As 
has  been  seen,  the  early  prophets  not  unfrequently  fell  into  a 
condition  of  frenzy  or  ecstasy;  and  in  such  a  state,  their  belief 
that  they  heard  heavenly  voices  and  saw  heavenly  sights  is  one 
which,  whilst  not  exciting  surprise,  does  not  command  implicit 
confidence.  The  same  belief  however  was  shared  by  the 
prophets  of  the  8th  and  following  centuries.  The  term  vision^ 
indeed,  is  often  used  merely  to  denote  a  prophetic  utterance 
(see  Is.  i.  i,  Obad.  i,  Nah.  i.  i) :  but  there  are  many  explicit 
descriptions  in  the  prophetic  writings  of  visionary  experiences. 
Amos  (ix.  i),  for  instance,  relates  that  he  saw  Jehovah  standing 
beside  the  altar;  and  Isaiah,  like  Micaiah  (z  Kg.  xxii.  19), 
declares  that  he  saw  Jehovah  sitting  upon  His  throne  and 
attended  by  His  celestial  court  {Is.  c.  vi.).  In  Ezekiel  and 
Zechariah  i.-viii.,  accounts  of  visions  are  exceptionally  numerous. 
The  prophecy  of  the  former  opens  with  a  detailed  narrative 
of  the  appearance  to  him  of  the  glory  of  Jehovah ;  whilst  the 
latter  relates  various  wonderful  sights  witnessed  by  him  and 
interpreted  to  him  by  an  angel.  This  testimony  of  the 
thoughtful  and  reflective  prophets,  who  committed  their  beliefs 
and  impressions  to  writing,  is  of  a  weightier  character  and 
claims  greater  consideration.  In  them  an  exalted  state  of 
feeling  was  combined  with  considerable  intellectual  powers  and 
acute  spiritual  perceptions;  and  it  seems  unreasonable  to  deny 
altogether  the  reality  of  their  experiences  just  because  they  are 
represented  as  transcending  those  of  ordinary  men.  Neverthe- 
less, that  there  was  a  certain  subjective  element,  alike  in  the 
voices  which  the  prophets  heard,  and  in  the  visions  which  they 
saw,  is  indicated  by  several  facts.  Some  of  the  visions  reproduce 
objects  with  which  the  prophet  who  witnessed  them  was  familiar 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  411 

in  his  daily  life.  For  example,  the  visions  of  the  cherubim  seen 
by  Ezekiel  (c.  i.),  who  was  one  of  the  captives  in  Babylonia, 
repeat  some  of  the  features  of  the  colossal  winged  Uons  and 
oxen  bearing  human  heads,  which  have  been  found  among  the 
ruins  of  Nineveh.  In  this  case  there  would  appear  to  be  a 
combination  (as  it  has  been  observed)^  into  new  forms,  of  the 
images  and  impressions  with  which  the  prophet's  mind  had 
previously  been  stored.  It  seems  probable  that  some  of  the 
details  of  Isaiah's  vision  (c.  vi.),  such  as  the  smoke,  the  altar, 
the  tongs,  were  likewise  derived  from  the  surroundings  of  the 
Temple,  which  is  expressly  declared  to  have  been  the  scene  of 
it.  In  cases  like  Am.  vii.  i,  viii.  2,  and  Jer.  xviii.  1-2,  in 
which  Jehovah  is  represented  as  showing  to  one  prophet  a  flight 
of  locusts  or  a  basket  of  summer  fruit,  and  directing  another 
to  visit  a  potter's  house,  the  explanation  presumably  is  that  the 
circumstances  in  which  the  prophets  found  themselves,  or  the 
objects  which  they  chanced  to  have  before  them,  gave  rise  to 
the  trains  of  thought  and  argument  which  they  describe  as 
occurring  in  their  converse  with  the  Deity.  Similarly,  v^^hen 
Ezekiel  in  Babylonia  states  that  he  was  brought  "  in  the  visions 
of  God"  to  Jerusalem  to  witness  the  idolatries  practised  there, 
it  may  reasonably  be  supposed  that  he  reproduces,  by  a  more 
or  less  conscious  process  of  reflection,  knowledge  which  he  had 
gained  when  resident  in  his  native  land.  A  like  account  is  still 
more  probable  in  cases  where  no  mention  is  made  of  any  vision. 
In  certain  instances  the  prophets  imply  that  it  was  only  after 
the  ivord  of  Jehovah  had  been  confirmed  by  some  subsequent 
occurrence  that  they  realised  the  true  origin  of  the  impulse 
which  seized  them  to  speak  or  act  in  a  particular  way  (see  Jer. 
xxxii.  7,  8,  already  alluded  to).  And  in  view  of  the  habits  of 
thought  prevailing  amongst  the  Hebrews  generally  (see  pp.  279-80) 
it  is  natural  to  conclude  that  Hosea,  in  relating  that  Jehovah 
commanded  him  to  take  "a  wife  of  whoredom,"  was  regarding 
his  unhappy  married  life  in  the  light  of  later  knowledge,  and 
describing  his  choice  of  a  woman  of  unchaste  disposition  as 
being  divinely  ordered  because  his  consequent  experiences  had 
conveyed  to  him  a  religious  lesson   of  great  value  and   wide 

^  See  'DnvQx,  Joel  and  Amos,  p.  201. 


4t2  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

application.  The  prophets,  it  would  appear,  did  not,  and 
probably  could  not,  discriminate  perfectly  between  what  was 
imparted  from  without  and  what  was  perceived  from  within, 
between  what  they  observed  and  what  they  inferred,  between  the 
direct  and  indirect  action  of  God.  They  were  not  ordinarily 
sensible  of  the  process  by  which  they  reached  the  truths  of 
which  they  became  possessed,  but,  assured  that  the  result  reached 
was  in  accord  with  the  Divine  counsels,  they  were  wont  to 
ascribe  it,  however  attained,  to  immediate  revelation.  They 
externalised  their  inward  convictions,  and  blended  together  the 
suggestive  sound  or  sight  with  the  suggested  thought.  The 
germs  of  ideas  and  expectations  and  hopes  which  they  inherited 
from  the  past  they  did  not  stay  to  disentangle  from  the  particular 
conclusions  in  the  present  to  which  they  contributed,  but 
referred  the  whole  to  the  agency  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  In  events 
which  had  a  determining  influence  either  upon  their  own 
individual  lives  or  upon  the  national  history  they  discerned  a 
providential  purpose,  without  caring  to  trace  the  proximate 
causes.  And  as  their  writings,  certainly  in  some  cases  and 
probably  in  all,  were  produced  after  some  lapse  of  time  had 
separated  them  from  the  actual  experiences  recorded,  it  may 
be  suspected  that  there  entered  into  their  accounts  of  what  had 
been  seen  or  heard  an  element  that  was  purely  imaginative. 
The  literary  art  which  is  observable  in  them  was  possibly  not 
confined  to  the  employment  of  the  ordinary  devices  of  rhetoric, 
but  extended  to  the  use  of  deliberately  chosen  symbolism,  even 
in  connection  with  the  Deity  Himself. 

But  though  it  is  impracticable  for  us  to  determine  in  what  pro- 
portion subjective  imagery  and  objective  reality  underlie  the 
phraseology  of  the  prophets,  or  to  distinguish  accurately  where 
they  themselves  fail  to  do  so,  the  resultant  features  of  Hebrew 
prophecy  are  of  a  very  exceptional  nature,  and  demand  an 
adequate  cause  to  account  for  them.  To  explain  the  phenomena 
presented  as  produced  by  the  co-operation  of  two  factors — a 
human  and  a  Divine — is  perhaps  open  to  the  objection  that 
such  an  explanation  assumes  a  Divine  origin  too  exclusively  for 
what  is  abnormal,  whereas  all  human  faculties  must  in  a  measure 
be  of  Divine  derivation.     But  it  may  be  safely  asserted  that  the 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  413 

facts  of  prophetic  history  imply  in  the  prophets  a  Divine  endow* 
ment  of  a  pre-eminent,  if  not  a  unique,  kind.  These  facts  are 
threefold.  In  the  first  place,  there  is  the  confident  conviction 
of  the  prophets  themselves  that  they  were  the  spokesmen  of  the 
Almighty  (which  has  already  been  considered).  Secondly,  there 
is  the  pure  and  lofty  character  of  their  teaching  (illustrated  in 
detail  in  the  sequel),  which,  in  general,  ran  counter  to  the  popular 
tendencies,  and  is  not  readily  explicable  by  national  or  racial 
qualities,  their  conceptions  of  the  Deity  being  more  spiritual, 
and  the  conceptions  of  His  service  being  more  ethical,  than 
were  those  which  prevailed  amongst  the  people  at  large  (who 
thought  that  Jehovah's  favour  could  be  obtained  by  external 
rites,  and  their  country's  security  assured  by  material  resources 
and  political  alliances,  independently  of  any  moral  conditions). 
And  finally,  there  is  the  fact  of  their  uttering  a  series  of  predic- 
tions which,  if  not  fulfilled  as  uniformly  or  exactly  as  is  sometimes 
supposed,  were  nevertheless  verified,  on  the  whole,  in  a  very 
remarkable  degree. 

That  the  prophets  themselves  believed  that  they  were  invested 
with  the  power  of  prediction  is  apparent  not  only  from  the 
evidence  afforded  by  the  histories  in  regard  to  the  earlier  pro- 
phets, such  as  Ahijah,  Micaiah,  Elijah,  and  Elisha  (/  Kg.  xiv.  12, 
xxii.  23,  2  Kg.  i.  6,  iii.  17),  but  from  the  first-hand  testimony  of 
such  of  them  as  have  left  written  compositions  behind  them.  It 
was  with  the  view  of  appealing  to  the  verdict  of  subsequent 
experience  that  they  directed  certain  of  their  utterances  to  be 
placed  on  record  and  carefully  preserved  (Is.  viii.  i,  16  (marg.), 
XXX.  8,  Jer,  xxx.  1-3,  H.  60,  Hah.  ii.  2).  Among  these  were 
announcements  concerning  the  immediate  future  which  they 
made  in  order  to  accredit  their  statements  respecting  a  period 
more  remote.  When  king  Ahaz  was  opposed  by  the  united 
forces  of  Rezin  and  Pekah,  Isaiah,  to  convince  him  of  the 
truth  of  his  own  assurance  that  his  fears  were  groundless,  bade 
him  ask  a  sign;  and  on  his  refusing,  proffered  as  such  the 
prediction  that  within  the  infancy  of  a  child  born  very  soon 
after  the  time  at  which  he  was  speaking  the  danger  to  Judah 
would  disappear  {Is.  vii.  7  foil).  When  Jeremiah  and  Hananiah 
confronted  each  other  with  contradictory  predictions  respecting 


414  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Nebuchadrezzar,  the  former  to  authenticate  his  own  assertions, 
foretold  that  his  opponent  would  die  the  same  year  i^Jer. 
c.  xxviii).  Similarly  Ezekiel  looked  forward  to  the  future  to 
confirm  his  words,  and  so  establish  his  authority  {Ezek.  xxxiii.  33). 
The  prophets  thus  evinced  their  confidence  in  their  pretensions 
to  speak  in  Jehovah's  name  by  committing  themselves  to  predic- 
tions which  their  contemporaries  would,  for  the  most  part,  be  in 
a  position  to  verify.  And  in  Deut,  xviii.  22  it  is  specifically  laid 
down  that  by  the  ability  to  foretell  what  is  to  come  true  and 
false  prophets  are  to  be  distinguished.  There,  the  occurrence  or 
non-occurrence  of  a  predicted  event  is  expressly  regarded  as  the 
criterion  of  a  prophet's  right  to  be  considered  a  messenger  of 
Jehovah. 

And  of  predictions  respecting  both  the  nearer  and  the  remoter 
future  uttered  by  the  writing  prophets,  the  substantial  fulfilment 
of  which  is  a  matter  of  history,  a  long  series  exists.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  enumerate  all  of  them  here,  but  the  most  remarkable 
may  be  briefly  noticed.  Amos,  the  earliest  of  the  prophets  of 
whom  written  memorials  have  been  preserved,  declared  to  the 
people  of  Israel  who  desired  to  see  the  day  of  Jehovah  that  it 
would  bring  them  darkness  and  not  light;  and  in  the  name  of 
Jehovah  he  asserted  that  they  should  go  into  captivity  beyond 
Damascus  (v.  27).  This  prediction  was  deHvered  in  the  reign 
of  Jeroboam  II.,  at  a  time  when  the  nation  was  enjoying  more 
prosperity  than  it  had  known  since  the  days  of  Solomon,  and 
when  the  Assyrians,  the  nameless  power  beyond  Damascus,  were 
inactive  and  quiescent.  Yet  less  than  forty  years  after  Amos  had 
prophesied,  Samaria  fell  before  Assyria  and  its  inhabitants  were 
deported.  The  prophet  also  declared  that  the  neighbouring 
Syrians  should  go  into  captivity  to  Kir  (i.  5);  and  in  2  Kg. 
xvi.  9  is  recorded  their  overthrow  and  their  exile  to  Kir^  some 
twenty  or  thirty  years  later.  The  same  two  events  confirmed 
likewise  the  predictions  of  Isaiah,  just  referred  to,  in  which  he 
asserted  that  the  designs  of  the  then  kings  of  Israel  and  Syria 
against  Judah  should  not  stand  or  come  to  pass  {Is.  vii.  7).  In 
the  case  of  Damascus,  its  overthrow  must  have  taken  place 
almost  within  the  very  narrow  limits  which  (as  has  been  seen)  the 

*  In  ^  Kg.  xvi.  9  the  LXX.  (B)  omits  the  mention  of  JCir. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  415 

prophet  designated  for  its  accomplishment,  though  the  downfall 
of  Pekah  of  Israel  was  probably  not  effected  quite  so  speedily. 
A  still  more  signal  prediction  of  the  last-named  prophet  was  his 
announcement,  in  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  that  Jerusalem  should 
successfully  defy  the  Assyrians  under  Sennacherib,  when  the 
latter  invaded  and  made  himself  master  of  the  Judaean  territory 
in  701  B.C.  (see  Is.  x.  5  foil,  xiv.  24-27,  xvii.  12-14,  cc.  xxxiii., 
xxxvi.,  xxxvii.).  Such  a  prediction  can  be  explained  as  little  as 
that  of  Amos,  just  related,  as  a  political  calculation ;  for  the  only 
human  power  which  was  in  any  way  a  match  for  Assyria  was 
Egypt,  and  of  Egypt  Isaiah  had  a  profound  distrust.  Moreover, 
the  prophet  expressly  told  his  countrymen  that  not  in  material 
resources  and  foreign  aid,  but  in  quietness  and  confidence  in 
Jehovah  would  their  strength  be  found  (Is.  xxx.  15).  Yet  the 
event  bore  him  out,  for  the  invader's  army  perished  (probably  of 
pestilence),  and  Jerusalem  remained  uncaptured.  The  approach- 
ing overthrow  of  Nineveh  forms  the  subject  of  Nahum's  brief 
prophecy ;  and  the  city  is  known  to  have  fallen  before  the  united 
forces  of  the  Medes  and  Babylonians  in  607 ;  but  as  the  precise 
date  of  Nahum  is  unknown,^  it  is  possible  that  in  this  case 
coming  events  had  already  begun  to  cast  their  shadows  before. 
The  fall  of  Nineveh  was  followed  closely  by  that  of  Jerusalem; 
and  its  capture  was  predicted  by  Jeremiah.  His  predictions  were 
flatly  opposed  to  those  current  among  the  nations  which  encour- 
aged the  Jewish  monarch  to  conspire  against  his  Babylonian 
suzerain  {Jer.  xxvii.  9) ;  but  they  proved  only  too  true.  The  city 
was  taken  and  a  large  body  of  its  inhabitants  was  carried  to 
Babylon.  But  much  more  remarkable  than  this  was  his  prophecy 
of  the  subsequent  restoration  of  the  exiles  from  the  land  of  their 
captivity.  There  was  nothing,  according  to  all  human  reckoning, 
less  likely  than  so  strange  a  retrieval  of  fortune.  Yet  the  asser- 
tion of  it  had  occurred  even  in  the  utterances  of  the  earlier 
prophets  of  the  8th  century,  who  chiefly  devoted   themselves 

^  According  to  Hdt.  i.  103,  Nineveh  was  unsuccessfully  attacked  by 
Cyaxares  some  years  before  the  siege  which  resulted  in  its  capture  in  607 
(see  p.  379) ;  and  Nahum's  prophecy  may  have  in  view  either  of  these  two 
occasions.  As  i.  13,  ii.  2  point  to  oppression  of  Judah  by  Assyria,  its  com- 
position could  scarcely  be  later  than  the  early  years  of  Josiah,  in  the  course  of 
whose  reign  the  power  of  Assyria  rapidly  waned  (see  p.  378). 


4i6  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  denouncing  their  country's  sins  and  predicting  its  punishment 
(Am.  ix.  11-15,  I/os.  i.  11,  iil  5,  Mic.  ii.  12-13,  vii.  11-12).! 
And  as  soon  as  the  exile  was  an  accomplished  fact,  both  Jeremiah 
(xxv.  12-13,  xxix.  10,  xxxiii.  7  foil.)  and  Ezekiel  (xi.  17,  xxxvii.  12) 
repeated  the  assertion  with  emphasis.  The  period  of  the  captivity 
was  indicated  by  these  two  prophets  respectively  by  the  conven- 
tional numbers  70  {/er.  xxv.  ii)^  and  40  {Ezek.  iv.  6).  And  just 
half  a  century  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem,  Babylon,  which 
had  overthrown  Assyria,  itself  fell  before  the  Persians ;  and  one 
of  the  first  acts  of  the  conqueror  Cyrus  was  to  grant  to  the  Jews 
liberty  to  return  to  their  homes. 

In  view  of  these  facts,  then,  it  would  seem  that  the  Hebrew 
prophets  actually  exercised,  as  they  certainly  claimed  to  possess, 
a  power  of  prevision  in  a  degree  beyond  the  ordinary  endowment 
of  humanity.  The  predictions  in  question  cannot  easily  be  ex- 
plained as  entirely  due  to  political  sagacity  in  combination  with 
strong  religious  faith,  on  account  both  of  the  form  they  assumed 
and  of  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  delivered.  The 
prophets  in  forecasting  the  future  did  not  balance  conflicting  con- 
siderations against  each  other ;  they  did  not  argue,  but  affirmed. 
And  as  has  been  seen,  many  of  their  announcements  were  made 
(so  far  as  can  be  judged)  in  defiance  of  the  probabilities  of  the 
case.  Nevertheless  their  prescience,  abnormal  and  singular  though 
it  was,  stood  in  a  certain  relation  both  to  the  principles  of  the 
Hebrew  religion  and  the  conditions  of  the  prophets'  own  times. 
On  the  one  hand,  the  prophets  were  collectively  penetrated  v/ith 
a  firm  belief  in  a  Divine  and  providential  ordering  of  the  events 
of  human  history.  They  recognised  in  Jehovah  the  Director  of 
the  fortunes  of  mankind  in  general,  and  more  especially  of  Israel, 
with  whom  He  had  entered  into  covenant.  Their  utterances, 
being  declarative  of  His  character  and  of  the  moral  principles 
regulating  His  deaUngs  with  His  people,  involved  in  consequence 
a  forecast  of  the  results  awaiting  a  certain  course  of  action.     And 

^  The  authenticity  of  some  of  these  passages  has  been  questioned  by  certain 
scholars ;  see  below,  p.  428,  note. 

^  The  conventional  character  of  the  figure  70  employed  by  Jeremiah 
appears  from  the  fact  that  he  used  it  equally  whether  he  was  speaking  in  the 
reign  of  Jehoiakim  (xxv.  11-12)  or  of  Zedekiah  (xxix.  10);  cf.  also  Is.  xxiii.  15, 
Zech.  vii.  5.     See  p.  391,  note,  and  p.  467. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  417 

inasmuch  as  their  belief  in  Jehovah's  righteousness  was  not  more 
profound  than  their  belief  in  His  faithfulness  towards  the  people 
chosen  to  be  His  own,  their  assurance  respecting  its  future  ex- 
tended to  the  final  issue  of  His  beneficent  purposes.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  manner  in  which  they  anticipated  that  those 
purposes  would  be  accomplished  was  to  some  extent  determined 
by  the  physical  or  political  forces  which  they  observed  at  work. 
The  precise  form  which  their  predictions  took  was  in  large 
measure  decided  by  contemporary  conditions :  in  their  descrip- 
tions of  the  future  they  were  guided  by  the  prospect  of  it  which 
was  afforded  by  the  present.  Hence  successive  prophets,  whilst 
repeating  the  general  laws  which  their  predecessors  asserted  to 
govern  Jehovah's  treatment  of  Israel,  yet  differed  in  their  con- 
ceptions both  of  the  way  in  which  they  would  operate  and  of  the 
nation  which  was  the  destined  agent  to  put  them  into  execution. 
For  example,  in  the  latter  part  of  Hosea's  lifetime  Assyria  and 
Egypt  were  the  two  most  powerful  neighbours  both  of  Israel  and 
of  Judah;  and  it  was  a  captivity  in  these  countries  that  the 
prophet  contemplated  as  being  in  store  for  his  countrymen  {Hos. 
ix.  3).  On  the  other  hand,  Isaiah,  at  least  in  his  later  years,  saw 
in  the  Assyrians  alone  Judah's  chief  source  of  alarm.  The  over- 
throw of  Israel  and  the  destruction  of  Samaria  had  shown  the 
weakness  of  Egypt  and  the  strength  of  Assyria ;  and  the  logic  of 
events  had  made  it  clear  how  untrustworthy  were  the  offers  of 
support  made  to  Judah  by  the  former  against  the  latter  {Is.  xxx. 
1-7,  cf.  xxxvi.  6).  In  the  early  days  of  Josiah  the  invasion  of 
the  Scythians  carried  devastation  into  Western  Asia ;  and  it  is  pro- 
bably they  who  are  alluded  to,  in  Jeremiah's  opening  chapters,  as 
about  to  carry  into  effect  God's  judgment  upon  His  people. 
Later,  Babylon  succeeded  to  the  inheritance  of  Assyria;  and  it  was 
to  Babylon  that  Jeremiah  eventually  declared  that  Judah  would  be 
taken  away  captive.  The  same  prophet's  prediction  (xlvi.  25-6) 
that  the  king  of  Babylon  would  invade  and  conquer  Egypt  might 
also  be  an  inference  from  antecedent  conditions ;  for  Egypt,  which 
not  long  before  had  opposed  Babylon  at  Carchemish,  had  given 
still  more  recent  provocation  by  sending  forces  to  relieve  Jeru- 
salem when  besieged  by  the  Babylonian  king.  From  the  fact 
that  the  prophet's  anticipations  of  the  future  were  thus  influenced 
2  £ 


4i8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

in  respect  of  details  by  their  knowledge  of  the  present  it  follows 
that  their  predictions  were  in  general  less  accurate  in  proportion 
as  the  future  to  which  they  related  was  more  remote  from,  and 
less  in  touch  with,  existing  conditions.  Thus  certain  of  the 
earlier  prophets,  whilst  foreteUing  that  a  judgment  was  to  over- 
take Israel  for  its  sins,  which  was  to  be  followed  by  a  subsequent 
deliverance  when  the  chastisement  had  served  its  purpose,  did  not 
explain  how  the  predicted  events  were  to  be  brought  about.  Amos, 
for  instance,  declared  that  Judah  (as  well  as  Israel)  was  destined 
to  suffer  disaster  (ii.  4-5),  from  which  it  was  eventually  to  be 
restored  (ix.  1 1  foil. ),  but  he  did  not  indicate  the  means  by  which 
either  issue  was  to  be  accomplished.  Isaiah  and  Micah,  whose 
prophecies  were  directly  addressed  to  Judah,  supplemented  the 
vagueness  of  Amos  about  the  dangers  threatening  that  country 
by  expHcitly  affirming  Assyria  to  be  the  destined  author  of  its 
calamities;  but  in  going  on  to  announce  its  recovery  and  final 
vindication  at  the  hands  of  Jehovah,  they  betray  no  knowledge  of 
the  disasters,  subsequent  to  the  Assyrian  scourge,  which  Judah 
was  to  suffer  from  Babylon.  Nahum,  writing  perhaps  in  the  reign 
of  Manasseh,  foretold  more  exactly  the  doom  of  Assyria  and  the 
destruction  of  its  capital  Nineveh;  but  he,  too,  shows  no  con- 
sciousness that  the  overthrow  of  Assyria  only  preluded  the  rise 
of  Babylon,  and  that  "the  bringing  again  of  the  excellency  of 
Jacob"  (ii.  2)  would  not  take  place  until  after  the  last-named 
power  had  subjugated  Judah  far  more  completely  than  Assyria 
had  ever  done.  Similarly  among  the  prophecies  which  relate  to 
foreign  nations,  instances  occur  of  events  being  ante-dated. 
Isaiah's  prediction  (c.  xx.)  concerning  Egypt,  delivered  shortly 
before  711  B.C.,  in  which  he  anticipated  the  early  invasion  of  that 
country  by  the  Assyrians  and  the  deportation  of  its  inhabitants, 
was  not  fulfilled  until  long  after  the  time  originally  designated ;  for 
Egypt,  though  often  menaced  by  Assyria,  was  not  successfully 
invaded  until  the  reign  of  Esar-haddon  (681-668).  Nor  again  did 
the  siege  of  Tyre,  predicted  by  Ezekiel  (c.  xxvi.),  and  undertaken 
by  Nebuchadrezzar,  result  on  that  occasion  as  the  prophet  ex- 
pected, for  at  a  later  date  he  represents  Jehovah  as  granting 
Egypt  to  Nebuchadrezzar  because  he  had  received  no  wages  for 
his  services  against  Tyre  (xxix.  17-20).     Moreover,  certain  events, 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  419 

though  they  substantially  confirmed  the  previous  predictions  of 
them,  were  not  attended  by  the  particular  circumstances  which 
the  prophets  contemplated.  Babylon,  for  instance,  really  fell 
before  its  enemies  the  Medes,  as  foretold  in  "A."  xiii.  17  ;  but  it 
was  not  then  actually  taken  by  storm,  as  there  described.  Other 
events  that  happened  in  accordance  with  prophetic  announce- 
ments were  not  accomplished  on  the  scale  anticipated.  Damascus, 
though  it  suffered  temporary  extinction,  was  not  finally  destroyed 
by  Assyria,  as  depicted  by  Isaiah  (xvii.  1-3) ;  and  the  return  of 
the  Jewish  exiles,  as  the  evidence  of  the  books  of  Ezra  and 
Nehemiah  shows  (cf.  Hag,  i.  6),  did  not  correspond  altogether  to 
the  accounts  which  Ezekiel  and  the  Second  Isaiah  gave  of  it 
beforehand.  In  the  last  instance,  the  prophet's  descriptions  were 
obviously  elaborated  under  the  influence  of  strong  emotion,  and 
allowance  must  be  made  for  their  rhetorical  character ;  but  even 
if  they  are  not  construed  au  pied  de  la  letire^  they  still  appear  out 
of  proportion  to  the  actual  event.  But  it  is  more  especially  in 
connection  with  the  final  accompHshment  of  Jehovah's  intentions 
towards  His  people  that  the  limitations  of  the  prophets'  foresight 
both  with  regard  to  time  and  conditions  are  discernible.  The 
consummation  of  Israel's  destiny  they  expected  to  be  realised 
much  sooner  than  proved  to  be  the  case.  In  particular,  they 
often  placed  it  in  close  succession  to  some  event  in  the  near 
future  which  they  more  or  less  accurately  foresaw,  with  the 
result  that  whilst  part  of  the  prediction  was  fulfilled,  part  was  left 
to  be  re-afiirmed  again  (usually  in  a  somewhat  different  shape)  by 
later  prophets.  Successive  generations  anticipated  that  there 
would  occur  within  their  own  age  the  advent  of  a  great  Personality 
who  should  be  the  glory  of  the  Israelite  race,  whilst  history 
only  brought  with  it  repeated  disillusions.  But  in  spite  of  disap- 
pointment the  hopes  of  the  prophets  continually  revived  afresh ; 
and  the  assertions  of  previous  ages  were  persistently  renewed. 
Eventually,  some  700  years  after  the  earliest  prophecies  of  an 
explicitly  Messianic  character  had  been  delivered,  Christ  was 
born,  and  claimed  to  fulfil  in  Himself  the  predictions  which  these 
and  others  contained.  And  the  strange  combination  of  essential 
agreement  and  much  circumstantial  divergence,  subsisting  between 
the  anticipation  and  the  event,  conspicuously  illustrates  the  real 


420  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

power  of  prescience,  together  with  its  very  considerable  qualifica- 
tions, which  the  prophets  possessed. 

The  partial  contradiction  which  the  immediate  future  gave  to 
so  many  prophetic  predictions  did  not  produce  either  on  the 
prophets  themselves  or  on  their  contemporaries  all  the  effect 
that  might  have  been  expected.  Since  such  predictions  had 
as  their  purpose  and  object  the  moral  and  spiritual  reformation 
of  those  to  whom  they  were  addressed,  they  were  necessarily, 
in  virtue  of  this  very  fact,  to  a  large  extent  conditional  and  not 
absolute  (see  Jer,  xviii.  7-10,  xxvi.  18  foil).  If  a  course  of 
action  that  had  been  denounced  was  discontinued,  the  con- 
sequences (it  was  generally  implied)  might  be  averted:  an 
alteration  in  the  predicted  fortune  might  be  secured  by  a  timely 
alteration  of  life.  Accordingly  the  announcements  of  the 
prophets  tended  to  defeat  themselves;  but  though  sometimes 
the  merciful  postponement  of  a  Divine  judgment  was  turned 
to  the  discredit  of  the  prophets  who  gave  warning  of  it  (see 
Ezek.  xii.  22),  yet  for  the  most  part  the  true  aim  and  intent  of 
their  utterances  respecting  the  future  was  clearly  understood. 
Conversely,  if  certain  promised  blessings  were  not  reahsed,  or  the 
realisation  fell  short  of  the  previous  announcement,  a  sufficient 
explanation  could  generally  be  found  in  the  imperfections  and 
unworthiness  of  those  to  whom  the  promise  was  given.  It  was 
chiefly  when  the  authority  of  the  prophets  to  speak  in  God's 
name  was  'challenged  that  they  sought  to  vindicate  it  by  an 
appeal  to  an  absolute  foreknowledge  of  things  to  come  (see 
Jer.  xxviii.  9,  and  cf  Deut,  xviii.  22,  Num,  xvi.  28  foil.).  Yet 
whilst  this  faculty  distinguished  them  in  general  from  false 
prophets,  who  prophesied  lying  dreams  and  spake  a  vision  of  their 
own  hearts  {sQQjer.  xxiii.  32,  16),  it  was  recognised  that  it  was 
possible  for  the  predictions  of  others  than  those  who  were 
Jehovah's  duly  accredited  messengers  to  prove  correct  occasion- 
ally. Consequently  to  guard  against  the  erroneous  conclusions 
which  in  such  cases  might  be  drawn  from  the  coincidence  be- 
tween the  announcement  of  an  event  and  its  occurrence,  fidelity 
to  the  principles  of  the  national  religion  was  held  to  be  an 
essential  requisite  of  a  true  prophet.  In  Deut.  xiii.  1-3  it  is 
strictly  enjoined  that  no  prophet  who  urged  the  people  to  go 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  421 

after  other  gods  should  be  heeded;  and  any  sign  or  wonder 
wrought  by  such  is  explained  as  due  to  Jehovah's  desire  to  put 
His  people  to  the  proof.  The  prophets  who  for  Israel  were 
intended  to  be  a  substitute  for  the  augurs  and  diviners  common 
amongst  other  nations,  are  regarded  in  Deut.  xviii.  14  foil,  as 
resembling  Moses  and  carrying  on  his  work;  and  it  was  to  the 
maintenance  among  the  people  of  their  ancestral  faith  that  a 
long  succession  of  loyal  servants  of  Jehovah  directed  their 
efforts  and  devoted  their  lives. 

But  whilst  the  prophets  were  thus  the  defenders  of  a  faith 
transmitted  to  them  from  the  past,  and  whilst  they  always  re- 
garded themselves,  in  respect  of  what  they  taught,  as  reformers 
and  not  innovators,  there  was  a  distinct  advance,  as  time  went 
on,  in  their  apprehension  of  the  germinal  truths  implicit  in  the 
Mosaic  religion.  This  advance  was  not  always  uniform  or  un- 
interrupted :  contemporary  prophets  sometimes  differed  in  their 
dispositions  and  consequently  in  their  ideals  (Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  are  noteworthy  instances) ;  and  a  particular  prophet 
might  have  less  in  common  with  others  of  his  own  epoch  than 
with  some  who  preceded  or  followed  him.  Even  certain  of 
those  who  are  stigmatised  as  false  prophets  may  have  been 
honestly  mistaken  in  their  beliefs,  clinging  blindly  to  convictions 
which  once  required  assertion,  but  which,  in  the  presence  of  new 
aspects  of  the  truth,  had  become  a  source  of  error  and  consequent 
peril  (see  Mic.  iii.  n).  Nevertheless,  if  attention  be  confined 
to  the  prophets  whose  writings  are  preserved  in  the  O.T.,  and 
the  writers  of  one  age  are  collectively  compared  with  those  of 
another,  a  similar  process  of  development,  in  respect  both  of 
moral  and  spiritual  ideas,  to  that  which  has  been  observed  in 
the  earlier  stages  of  the  Hebrew  religion  is  discernible;  and 
the  greater  abundance  and  trustworthiness  of  the  material  which 
is  available  for  investigation  from  the  8th  century  onwards  makes 
it  possible  to  follow  it  with  increased  fulness  and  precision.  The 
development  in  question  centres  round  two  main  problems,  (i) 
the  nature  of  Jehovah,  His  relation  to  the  world,  and  the 
character  of  the  service  He  chiefly  requires,  (2)  the  bond  ex- 
isting between  Him  and  Israel,  its  true  significance,  and  its 
ultimate  purpose;   and  the  contributions  made  to  the  solution 


422  OLD  TESTAMENT  HISTORY 

of  these  questions  by  successive  generations  of  prophets  must 
now  receive  consideration  by  the  resumption  of  the  narrative 
which  this  digression  interrupted. 

The  prophets  who  were  more  or  less  contemporary  with  the 
period  of  Assyrian  supremacy  were  Amos,  Hosea,  Isaiah,  and 
Micah;  and  an  account  of  their  teaching  is  a  necessary  supplement 
to  the  description  previously  given  of  the  external  condition  of 
religion  in  Israel  during  this  age.  As  has  been  just  observed,  the 
prophets  were  the  spiritual  children  of  Moses,  to  whose  ruling 
ideas  they  desired  to  recall  their  countrymen.  Among  the 
cardinal  features  of  the  Mosaic  law  were  included  exclusive 
devotion  to  Jehovah,  worship  without  the  medium  of  images, 
avoidance  of  Canaanite  impurity,  and  the  merciful  treatment  of 
the  poor  and  unfortunate ;  and  in  the  minds  of  those  who  were 
imbued  with  its  principles  a  fuller  appreciation  of  the  conduct 
demanded  of  those  who  professed  obedience  to  it  had  made 
itself  felt  in  the  course  of  time.  On  the  other  hand,  among  the 
people,  as  a  whole,  social  oppression  and  religious  infidelity 
largely  prevailed,  in  flagrant  defiance  of  Jehovah's  known  re- 
quirements. Such  sins  were  seen  to  deserve,  and  certain  to 
receive,  condign  punishment ;  and  in  the  frequent  calamities  of 
earthquake,  drought,  and  war  the  prophets  of  the  8th  century 
saw  the  agents  of  the  Divine  judgment.  In  this,  indeed,  they 
did  not  go  beyond  their  predecessors.  But  the  wider  outlook, 
which  increased  acquaintance  with  the  more  distant  parts  of  the 
world  gave  them,  and  a  closer  observation  of  the  general  trend 
of  recent  political  movements  could  not  but  enlarge  their  con- 
ceptions both  of  the  sphere  and  the  purpose  of  the  Divine 
operations.  The  extent  and  power  of  the  Assyrian  empire  in 
particular,  must  have  affected  their  estimate  of  the  place  and 
importance  of  their  own  nation  among  the  peoples  of  the  earth, 
and  given  a  decisive  impulse  to  more  comprehensive  views  of 
Jehovah  and  His  relation  to  the  world  at  large.  Its  far-reaching 
ambition  familiarised  them  with  the  thought  of  a  universal  and 
world-wide  sovereignty ;  and  its  actual  aggrandisement  at  the 
expense  of  so  many  neighbouring  countries,  if  it  was  not  to  be 
explained  as  due  to  the  superiority  of  its  gods  over  those  of 
other  peoples  (Israel  included),  had  to  be  embraced  within  a 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  423 

profounder  doctrine  concerning  Israel's  own  God ;  and  it  was 
by  means  of  a  fresh  presentation  of  Israel's  traditional  faith  that 
the  prophets  confronted  the  situation.  They  did  not,  indeed,  by 
any  means  break  with  the  fundamental  conceptions  of  the  past, 
or  relinquish  the  belief  that  Israel  was  Jehovah's  chosen  people ; 
but  the  growing  conviction  that  Jehovah's  interest  was  not  com- 
pletely confined  to  Israel  inevitably  modified  their  idea  of  the 
end  which  such  a  choice  had  been  intended  to  subserve. 

The  two  principal  subjects  upon  which  Hebrew  thought  under- 
went considerable  development  in  the  course  of  history  have 
already  been  indicated,  viz.  (i)  the  character,  supremacy,  and  re- 
quirements of  Jehovah,  and  (2)  the  nature  and  purpose  of  the 
tie  between  Jehovah  and  Israel;  and  in  regard  to  these  the 
doctrine  of  the  prophets  of  the  Assyrian  age,  viewed  collectively, 
possesses  certain  distinctive  features. 

I.  (a)  From  the  first  there  had  entered  into  Israel's  religion  the 
belief  that  Jehovah  was  the  author  and  vindicator  of  moral  laws 
enjoining  uprightness  and  humanity.  But  a  noteworthy  advance 
was  made  in  this  age  by  the  revelation  of  Jehovah  as  a  God  not 
of  righteousness  only,  but  of  love.  This  conception,  indeed,  was 
not  so  much  an  addition  to,  as  a  development  of,  previously 
existing  ideas,  for  a  belief  in  the  Divine  goodness  was  implicit  in 
the  thought  that  Israel  was  Jehovah's  son  (Ex.  iv.  22);  and 
Jehovah's  compassion  and  graciousness  are  declared  in  Ex. 
xxxiv.  6-7.  But  in  Isaiah  and  Hosea  the  loving-kindness  of 
Jehovah  finds  outward  expression  in  language  of  the  tenderest 
affection.  Jehovah  proffers  the  fullest  forgiveness  to  His  sinful 
people  (Is.  i.  18);  He  invites  them  to  return  to  Him  from  Whom 
they  have  revolted  (xxxi.  6) ;  and  waits  patiently  that  He  may  have 
mercy  upon  them  (xxx.  1 8).  To  Israel,  at  one  time  as  a  fickle 
bride,  at  another  time  as  a  wayward  child,  are  addressed  appeals 
breathing  all  the  spirit  of  human  love,  intensified  by  the  under- 
lying consideration  that  the  Speaker  is  not  man  but  God 
(Hos.  ii.  14  foil,  xi.  I,  8-9,  xiv.  4).  And  concomitantly  with 
this  enlargement  of  the  prophets'  apprehension  of  the  moral 
side  of  the  Divine  Being  there  is  visible  an  increasing  sense  of 
His  spirituality.  Antagonism  to  image  worship  had  always 
characterised  the  best  Hebrew  thought,   except  when  that  sin 


424  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

had  become  relatively  insignificant  by  the  side  of  some  worse 
declension  from  the  nation's  true  faith.  But  in  Hosea  (viii.  6, 
xiii.  2),  Isaiah  (ii.  8,  xxxi.  7)  and  Micah  (v.  13)  it  is  especially  the 
uselessness  and  folly  of  men  worshipping  stocks  and  stones,  the 
work  of  their  own  hands,  that  is  dwelt  upon.  Isaiah,  in  particu- 
lar, to  describe  the  objects  to  which  worship  was  paid  alike  by 
the  unfaithful  Israelites  and  by  foreign  peoples,  employs  a  term 
which  means  "non-entities"  {Is.  ii.  8,  18,  x.  10,  11,  xix.  i  etc). 
The  unlikeness  of  God  to  man  himself  is  asserted  {Hos,  xi.  9) : 
God  is  not  flesh  but  spirit  {Is.  xxxi.  3).  The  comparatively 
familiar  relations  which  once  marked  the  converse  of  man  with 
his  Maker  now  give  place  to  an  attitude  of  greater  reverence 
and  awe.  The  increased  consciousness  of  Jehovah's  exalted 
nature  manifests  itself  in  the  insistence  upon  humility  {Mic.  vi.  8), 
and  the  reprobation  of  anything  savouring  of  human  pride  and 
arrogance  {Is.  ii.  12-17,  x.  12-19),  or  of  dependence  upon 
material  resouces  {Hos.  i.  7,  viii.  14,  xiv.  3,  Mic.  v.  lo-ii).  The 
political  intrigues  and  machinations  in  which  contemporary 
statesmanship  reposed  such  trust  were  equally  futile  and  impious. 
Tranquil  confidence  in  Jehovah  was  all  that  was  necessary  to 
ensure  His  people's  safety,  however  threatening  might  be  the 
danger  {Is.  vii.  8,  xxviii.  16,  xxx.  15). 

{b)  In  the  national  belief  that  Jehovah  was  a  God  of  righteous- 
ness there  had,  no  doubt,  always  been  implicit  to  some  extent  the 
truth  that  His  rule  was  universal ;  but  the  thinkers  of  Israel  had 
not  hitherto  thought  of  God  as  taking  account  of  moral  offences 
outside  Israel  except  where  their  own  nation  was  either  the  victim 
(as  in  the  case  of  Egypt)  or  the  avenger,  of  such  (as  in  the 
instance  of  the  Canaanites).  Now,  however,  Amos  censured  in 
the  name  of  Jehovah  not  only  the  barbarities  committed  by  the 
Syrians  and  Ammonites  upon  the  population  of  Gilead  (i.  3,  13), 
but  also  the  slave-raids  of  the  people  of  Gaza,  and  the  slave- 
traffic  practised  by  Tyre,  of  which  there  is  no  indication  that 
Israelites  in  particular  were  the  victims  (i.  6-8,  9-10)  ;  and  he 
condemned  even  the  vindictiveness  of  the  king  of  Moab  in 
burning  into  lime  the  bones  of  the  king  of  Edom,  a  nation 
which  had  often  been  hostile  to  Israel  (ii.  i).  The  prophets, 
indeed,  continued  to  judge  of  the  Divine  purposes  in  current 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  425 

events  chiefly  as  they  affected  their  own  people  {Is.  v.  26,  vii.  18, 
X.  5).  But  Divine  providence  was  no  longer  viewed  exclusively 
from  a  national  standpoint.  Jehovah's  creative  and  informing 
activity  was  asserted  in  the  most  comprehensive  terms,  and 
dominion  was  claimed  for  Him  over  universal  nature.  It  was 
Jehovah  who  framed  the  mountains,  made  the  vault  of  heaven 
with  its  constellations,  and  ruled  the  waters  of  the  sea  {Am.  iv. 
13,  V.  8-9,  ix.  6),^  and  of  His  glory  was  the  whole  earth  full 
{Is.  vi.  3).  His  knowledge  was  as  great  as  His  power:  He 
could  tell  man's  secret  meditations  {Am.  iv.  13),  and  beside  His 
wisdom  the  understanding  of  the  wise  was  folly  {Is.  xxix.  14). 
He  was  declared  to  have  directed  the  movements  and  migrations 
of  the  Philistines  and  the  Syrians  equally  with  those  of  Israel 
{Am.  ix.  7).  The  triumphs  and  disasters  of  foreign  nations  in 
their  mutual  conflicts  were  represented  as  due  to  His  ordering. 
The  king  of  Assyria,  notwithstanding  his  boastful  self-confidence, 
was  but  an  unconscious  instrument  of  correction  in  His  hand,  to 
be  laid  aside  when  the  desired  end  was  accomplished  {Is.  x.  5- 
15,  xxxvii.  26-29).  Ethiopia,  Egypt,  and  Philistia  were  natur- 
ally objects  of  interest  as  actively  influencing  Israel's  fortunes 
{Is.  xviii.-xx.,  xiv.  29-32),  but  attention  was  not  confined  to  these 
alone.  States  of  minor  importance  in  the  politics  of  the  time 
received  consideration ;  and  oracles  were  deUvered  by  Isaiah 
respecting  the  destinies  of  Tyre,  Moab,  Edom,  and  Arabia 
(xxiii.,  xvi.  13-14,  xx.  11 -16). 

{c)  In  the  law  of  Moses  no  marked  distinction  was  drawn 
between  moral  and  ceremonial  requirements.  Jehovah  was  there 
represented  as  exacting  equal  obedience  for  all  its  enactments, 
whether  regulative  of  public  worship  or  civil  justice.  But  the 
prophets  of  this  era  discriminated  carefully  between  the  value 
of  ritual  and  moral  service  in  the  sight  of  Jehovah,  and  dis- 
paraged and  denounced  the  former  when  divorced  from  the  latter 
{Am.  iv.  4-5,  V.  21-24,  Hos.  vi.  6,  viii.  13,  Is.  i.  11-14,  -^"^I^^-  vi. 

*  These  passages  by  some  scholars  are  thought  to  be  insertions  of  later 
date  ;  but  it  is  only  v.  8-9  which  coheres  awkwardly  with  its  context  (ver.  10 
continuing  the  sense  not  of  ver.  9  but  of  ver.  7)  and  is  consequently  suspicious. 
On  the  other  hand,  that  passages  of  this  kind  were  sometimes  interpolated  is 
shown  by  the  occurrence  of  one  such  in  the  LXX.  of  Hos.  xiii.  4,  which  i* 
absent  from  the  Heb. 


426  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

6-8).  That  their  conception  of  worship,  indeed,  was  not  purely 
spiritual,  altogether  independent  of  external  conditions  {S./oh, 
iv.  21,  23),  would  be  sufficiently  manifest  from  the  fact  that  they 
regarded  Zion,  which  was  so  inseparably  associated  with  the 
Temple  and  its  organisation,  as  pre-eminently  the  centre  of  the 
Divine  activity  and  the  seat  of  the  Divine  revelation  (Is.  ii.  2 
{  =  Mic.  iv.  2),  viii.  18,  xviii.  7,  xxviii.  16),  even  if  sacrifice  were 
not  explicitly  recognised  as  the  fitting  expression  of  a  pious 
people's  homage  to  Jehovah  {Is.  xix.  21).  But  they  condemned 
in  no  uncertain  language  the  substitution  of  assiduous  and 
correct  ritual  for  upright  conduct  in  social  life.  They  insisted 
that  the  holiness  demanded  by  Jehovah,  the  Holy  One,  from  His 
people  was  not  physical  or  ceremonial  but  ethical,  and  were 
themselves  filled  with  fear  in  the  Divine  presence  not  by  reason 
of  the  physical  act  of  looking  upon  God  (like  Manoah  in  /ud. 
xiii.  22),  but  because  of  their  uncleanness  in  thought  and  word 
{Is.  vi.  5).  If  the  Deity  had  to  be  approached,  the  condition 
of  drawing  near  was  no  longer  unshodden  feet,  but  moral 
purification  (ver.  6,  7).  In  this  age,  too,  the  violent  measures 
adopted  by  earlier  prophets  for  suppressing  a  false  religion  by 
extirpating  its  votaries  (cf.  i  Kg.  xviii.  40)  were  no  longer  ap- 
proved; the  sole  means  employed  were  appeals  to  the  nation's 
intelligence  and  conscience.  The  sanguinary  cruelties  once  com- 
mitted in  the  cause  of  religion  were  expressly  condemned  and 
repudiated.  By  Hosea  Jehovah  was  represented  as  avowing  His 
purpose  to  avenge  the  blood  shed  at  Jezreel  by  Jehu  {2  Kg. 
X.  11),  even  though  the  victims  were  slain  in  the  course  of  a 
religious  reformation  as  well  as  of  a  dynastic  revolution,  and 
though  the  slaughter  seemingly  was  countenanced  by  contem- 
porary prophets  {2  Kg.  x.  30). 

2.  {a)  This  deeper  sense  of  their  countrymen's  religious  short- 
comings, and  this  broader  view  of  Jehovah's  relations  to  the 
world  at  large,  combined  to  modify  the  belief  previously  enter- 
tained of  Jehovah's  interest  in,  and  dealings  with,  Israel  itself. 
Jehovah  had  hitherto  been  thought  to  be  exclusively  on  the 
side  of  Israel  in  its  contests  with  other  nations;  and  though 
He  had  occasionally  allowed  it  to  suffer  adversity  as  a  penalty 
for  its  sins,  yet  the  popular  conviction  was  that  in  any  momentous 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  427 

conflict  He  would  intervene  to  deliver  His  own  people  and 
confound  their  enemies;  and  the  day  of  Jehovah  was  therefore 
(as  has  been  said)  anticipated  with  eagerness  and  confidence 
(Am.  V.  18).  But  the  prophets,  in  virtue  of  their  knowledge  of 
God's  real  requirements  and  His  people's  failure  to  satisfy  them, 
foresaw  that  a  signal  judgment  was  destined  to  overtake  their 
country.  Amos  declared  that  the  day  of  Jehovah  would  bring 
to  the  nation  darkness  and  not  light  (A7ti.  v.  18-20);  and  in 
the  absence  of  any  thorough  reformation,  both  he  and  others 
anticipated  for  the  people  no  temporary  disaster,  but  captivity 
in  a  foreign  land  (Am.  v.  27,  vii.  17).  The  agent  of  the  Divine 
judgment  was  not  obscurely  indicated.  Hosea,  who  prophesied 
in  Israel,  refers  to  both  Egypt  and  Assyria  (ix.  3,  6),  for  whose 
support  the  factions  in  Samaria  were  alternately  bidding.  But 
Amos,  who  likewise  addressed  the  Northern  Kingdom,  in  declaring 
that  the  nation  was  to  go  into  captivity  beyond  Damascus  (v.  27), 
clearly  had  Assyria  in  his  mind;  whilst  it  was  the  same  power 
which  Isaiah  and  Micah  foresaw  threatened  destruction  to  Judah. 
Isaiah,  indeed,  predicted,  for  the  most  part,  that  its  capital,  Zion, 
would  defy  the  invader  (xxxvii.  22,  33),^  and  that  a  remnant  of  hei 
citizens  would  survive  the  coming  ruin  (vi.  13,  x.  20-22);  but 
he,  like  his  contemporaries,  contemplated  banishment  for  the 
bulk  of  the  population  of  the  country  (vi.  11).  Yet  the  prophets, 
notwithstanding  their  sense  of  their  people's  unworthiness  and 
their  consciousness  that  God's  care  and  interest  were  not  con- 
fined to  it,  neither  contradicted  nor  ignored  their  countrymen's 
belief  in  a  bond  or  covenant,  subsisting  between  themselves  and 
Jehovah.  Though  the  doom  of  the  guilty  nation  was  to  be  so 
severe,  they  declared  that  the  house  of  Jacob  should  not  utterly 
be  destroyed  {Am.  ix.  8).  Their  conviction  that  Jehovah's 
righteousness  would  be  vindicated  to  the  utmost  did  not  ex- 
tinguish in  them  the  inherited  belief  in  Jehovah's  faithfulness. 
They  entertained  and  expressed  a  confident  assurance  that  the 
fortunes  of  the  nation,  after  a  period  of  humiliation,  would 
revive,  and  that  eventually  Jehovah  would  restore,  even  from 
exile,  the  people  of   His  covenant  {Hos.  xi.   lo-ii   (cf.  i.   10, 

*  In  xxxii.   13  Isaiah  seems  to  contemplate  the  desolation  of  the  capital 
{the  joyous  town  of  xxii.  2) ;  see  also  xxix.  3-4. 


428  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

vi.    1-2),  Am.  ix.    14,  Is.  xi.   11,  Mic,  iv.   6-7   (cf.  ii   12-13, 
vii.  12)).^ 

This  belief  of  the  prophets  in  an  ultimate  deliverance  in  store 
for  their  country,  whether  it  consisted  in  the  survival  on  their 
native  soil  of  a  small  section  of  the  people  or  in  the  restoration 

*  The  authenticity  of  many  of  the  passages  here  cited  from  AmoSy  Isaiah, 
and  Micah  has  been  disputed. 

1.  Am.  ix.  11-15  has  been  regarded  as  a  later  insertion  because  (a)  elsewhere 
the  prophet  appears  to  contemplate  the  total  destruction  of  Israel  (see  v.  2) ; 
{b)  the  accomplishment  of  the  ruin  of  Judah  (foretold  in  ii.  4-5)  seems  here  to 
have  taken  place ;  {c)  the  predicted  restoration  is  not  explicitly  declared  to  be 
dependent  on,  or  inclusive  of,  a  moral  reformation.  But  it  is  difficult  to  think 
that  a  prophet  who  asserted  the  uniqueness  of  Jehovah's  relations  with  Israel 
(iii.  2)  could  believe  that  the  Divine  purpose  involved  in  such  an  intimacy 
could  be  permanently  thwarted;  whilst  the  moral  change  conditioning  the 
restoration  promised  in  this  section  of  the  book  is  sufficiently  impUed  in  all 
that  precedes  it. 

2.  Is.  xi.  10-16  (with  xii.)  is  held  by  many  to  be  later  than  Isaiah  chiefly  on 
the  ground  (a)  that  the  dispersion  from  which  the  exiles  are  to  be  gathered  is 
wider  than  is  likely  to  have  been  the  case  with  those  deported  in  Isaiah's 
time,  ifi)  that  the  term  remnant  (ver.  ii)  in  Isaiah  generally  refers  not  to 
those  in  exile  but  to  those  who  are  left  on  Israelite  soil.  A  confident  con- 
clusion is  difficult,  for  though,  on  the  one  hand,  the  countries  from  which  the 
exiles  are  restored  are  Egypt  and  Assyria  (as  in  Hos.  xi.  ii)  and  their  subject 
provinces  (cf.  Is.  xxii.  6,  xxxvii.  13),  not  Babylon^  and  as  a  large  body 
of  Judaeans  were  actually  led  into  captivity  by  Sennacherib  (see  p.  370}, 
Isaiah  may  well  have  included  their  return  among  his  forecasts  of  the  future 
happiness  in  store  for  his  country,  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  Egypt  and  Assyria 
are  named  as  the  abodes  of  Jewish  captives  in  the  (probably)  post-exilic 
section  xxiv.-xxvii.  (see  xxvii.  13).  If  the  passage  is  really  later  than  Isaiah, 
it  is  probably  post-exilic,  the  second  time  (ver.  ii)  presupposing  the  return 
from  Babylon  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus. 

3.  Of  Micah  portions  of  c.  iv.-v.,  and  the  section  vii.  7-20  have  been 
questioned  on  various  grounds,  (a)  In  regard  to  iv.,  v.,  it  may  be  argued 
that  iv.  6-10  predicts  the  capture  of  Zion,  the  exile  of  its  citizens  in  Babylon 
(which  may  be  considered  as  a  province  of  the  Assyrian  empire,  cf.  2  Kg. 
xvii.  24),  and  their  eventual  return,  whereas  in  iv.  ii-v.  9  there  are  foretold 
the  repulse  of  the  attack  upon  Jerusalem  and  the  overthrow  of  the  nation's 
invaders ;  and  that  this  discrepancy  makes  it  improbable  that  both  passages 
proceed  from  the  same  author.  But  the  authenticity  of  the  prediction  of 
captivity  in  iv.  6-10  is  supported  by  i.  16  (cf.  ii.  4,  iiL  12),  whilst  it  is 
possible  to  regard  iv.  ii-v.  9  as  relating  to  t^tnis  posterior  to  a  restoration 
from  such  captivity.  If  so,  the  passage  anticipates  ideas  which  appear  in 
the  Apocalyptic  predictions  of  the  later  prophets  (see  p.  451).  {b)  The 
section  vii.  7-20  is  an  utterance  of  the  people  who  are  assumed  to  be  already 
in  exile  and  expecting  the  re-building  of  Jerusalem  (ver.  il).  Micah's 
authorship  is  supported  by  the  fact  that  the  scene  of  the  exile  is  Assyria, 
not  Babylon,  and  by  the  allusion  to  Gilead,  which  was  ravaged  in  Micah's 
time.  There  is,  however,  a  general  resemblance  in  thought  to  2  Is.,  and 
it  is  possible  that  Assyria  may  represent  Babylon  (as  it  represents  Persia  in 
Ez.  vi.  22). 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  429 

of  the  nation  in  general  after  a  period  of  captivity,  did  not 
necessarily  blunt  the  edge  of  their  threats  of  judgment,  for  in 
the  former  case  only  a  fraction  of  the  community  would  be 
preserved,  and  in  the  latter  the  generation  that  would  go  into 
exile  was  not  likely  to  be  that  which  would  return  from  it.  Nor 
did  it  imply  that  the  future  would  be  a  mere  repetition  of  the 
past.  It  is  throughout  pre-supposed  that  the  punishment  inflicted 
upon  Israel  would  not  be  vindictive  only,  but  purgatorial  {Is. 
i.  25,  xxxii.  16-17,  xxxiii.  14-16,  Mic.  vii.  9,  19).  The  pride  and 
arrogance  of  such  as  survived  would  cease,  and  the  trust  which 
they  had  placed  in  earthly  supporters  would  be  transferred  to 
Jehovah  {Is.  x.  20,  Hos.  xiv.  3);  their  idolatrous  tendencies 
would  be  reformed  {Hos.  xiv.  3,  8,  Is.  xxx.  22,  xxxi.  7);  they 
would  henceforward  be  called  holy,  and  their  city  the  city  of 
righteousness  {Is.  iv.  3,  i.  26) ;  and  Jehovah  would  reign  over 
them  {Mic.  iv.  7).  A  prominent  feature  in  the  picture  here 
contemplated  is  the  reconciliation  of  the  two  branches  of  the 
house  of  Jacob.  The  mutual  envy  and  jealousy  of  Ephraim 
and  Judah  are  to  be  brought  to  an  end  {Is.  xi.  13),  and  the 
two  nations  are  once  more  to  be  united  under  one  head  {Hos. 
i.  11).  Upon  the  cessation  of  internal  wickedness  there  will 
ensue  the  cessation  of  external  fears  {Is.  i.  19-20) ;  and  the 
desolation  caused  by  foreign  oppressors  will  be  repaired  {Is. 
iv.  2,  xxx.  23).  In  describing  the  security  and  happiness  that 
awaits  the  restored  community  the  prophets  represent  nature  itself 
as  being  transformed  {Is.  xxx.  26);  and  revert  to  the  traditions 
of  mount  Sinai  and  the  Mosaic  age  to  find  expressions  for  the 
protection  and  glory  which  Jehovah  will  bestow  upon  His  people 
(Is.  iv.  5). 

{b)  But  the  ideal  future  which  the  prophets  predicted  for 
their  people  was  unlike  the  past  not  only  in  regard  to  the 
permanent  reformation  which  Israel  itself  was  to  experience,  but 
in  regard  to  its  relations  with  the  heathen  world.  In  earlier 
times  the  attitude  which  Israel  was  expected  to  maintain  towards 
nations  of  another  faith  was  one  of  aloofness,  if  not  open 
hostility.  Extermination  rather  than  conversion  was  the  rule 
followed,  at  least  in  respect  of  the  Canaanites;  and  even  the 
prophets  of  this  age,  when  describing  the  ultimate  triumph  of 


430  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

their  nation  occasionally  depict  it  as  annihilating  its  adversaries 
{Mic.  V.  7-8),^  as  subjugating  and  despoiling  the  neighbouring 
peoples  of  Philistia,  Edom,  Moab,  and  Ammon  {Is.  xi.  14),^  and 
as  recovering  by  conquest  the  territories  that  were  once  in- 
cluded in  David's  kingdom  and  were  called  by  Jehovah's  name 
{Am.  ix.  12  marg.).i  The  wealth  of  the  merchant-city  of  Tyre  is 
represented  as  destined  to  be  diverted  to  the  use  of  Jehovah's 
servants  in  consequence  of  a  Divine  judgment :  after  being  laid 
waste,  according  to  Jehovah's  purpose  against  her,  for  seventy 
years,  she  is  to  be  visited  by  Him,  and  though  she  will  then 
be  left  to  pursue  her  former  base  traffic,  her  merchandise,  instead 
of  being  treasured  and  laid  up,  will  be  devoted  to  the  support 
of  those  who  dwell  before  Him  {Is.  xxiii.).  But  in  general  a 
different  disposition  is  manifested  by  the  prophets,  and  they  are, 
for  the  most  part,  animated  by  a  generous  spirit  towards  the  rest 
of  mankind,  and  look  forward  to  a  future  time  when  other  nations 
will  become  acquainted  with  Jehovah  and  submit  to  His  rule, 
and  thereby  share  in  the  blessings  hitherto  enjoyed  exclusively  by 
Israel.  They  believe  that  the  wonderful  deliverance  which 
Israel,  after  suffering  for  its  sins,  is  to  experience  will  so  impress 
the  nations  that  they  will  come  with  fear  to  Jehovah,  and  be 
afraid  because  of  His  people  {Mic.  vii.  16-17).^ 

In  some  passages  the  idea  of  the  conversion  of  the  world  to 
Jehovah  is  expressed  in  vague  and  general  terms.  To  Mount 
Zion,  eventually  to  be  exalted  to  the  leading  position  among  the 
mountains  of  the  earth,  all  nations  are  to  flow,  to  seek  there 
the  way  of  Jehovah  that  they  may  walk  in  His  paths  {Is.  ii.  2-4  = 
Mic.  iv.  1-3).  The  whole  earth  is  to  be  filled  with  the  knowledge 
of  Jehovah  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea  {Is.  xi.  9).  In  other 
passages,  particular  nations,  including  those  from  whom  Israel 
had  suffered  most  harm,  are  described  as  being  brought,  either 
through  the  emotions  of  awe  and  wonder,  or  by  the  mingled 
discipline  of  judgment  and  mercy,  to  serve  Jehovah.  The 
distant  Ethiopians  are  conceived  as  paying  homage  to  Him  as 
tributaries,  and  sending  a  present  to  the  place  of  His  name, 
Mount  Zion  {Is.  xviii.).  Egypt,  after  being  delivered  over  to 
a  cruel  lord  and  experiencing  the  extremity  of  humihation  and 

*  On  these  sections  see  p.  428,  note. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  431 

suffering,  shall  cry  unto  Jehovah  and  He  shall  send  them  a 
saviour ;  He  shall  be  known  to  the  Egyptians,  and  the  Egyptians 
shall  know  Him,  and  shall  worship  Him  with  sacrifice  and 
oblation  {/s.  xix).  In  this  last  passage  Hebrew  prophecy 
manifests  a  degree  of  generous  comprehensiveness  which 
has  few  parallels  in  the  O.T.  In  it  the  very  titles  hitherto 
conferred  upon  Israel  alone  are  represented  as  bestowed  upon 
Israel's  most  faithless  friend  and  most  merciless  foe :  "  In  that 
day  shall  Israel  be  the  third  with  Egypt  and  with  Assyria,  a 
blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  earth  ;  for  that  Jehovah  of  Hosts 
hath  blessed  them,  saying.  Blessed  be  Egypt  my  people,  and 
Assyria  the  work  of  my  hands,  and  Israel  my  inheritance" 
(ver.  24-25).! 

(c)  With  regard  to  the  means  whereby  these  great  results  were 
to  be  accomplished  both  for  Israel  and  mankind,  the  prophetic 
writers  were  not  always  explicit.  For  the  most  part  they  thought 
of  Jehovah  as  intervening  to  deliver  His  people  and  judge  their 
enemies  by  some  signal  event  or  series  of  events  not  further 
elucidated.  But  occasionally  their  hopes  of  the  future  took  a 
more  precise  form,  which  was  determined  by  those  conditions 
and  agencies  which  had  been  most  influential  for  good  in  the 
nation's  past  history.  Israel's  place  amongst  the  peoples  of  the 
world  had,  in  the  main,  been  secured  by  David;  and  whatever 
may  have  been  the  feeling  of  the  tribes  constituting  the  Northern 
Kingdom,  the  attachment  of  Judah  to  the  Davidic  house  had 
by  the  middle  of  the  8th  century  stood  the  test  of  nearly  300 
years.  Nor  by  a  race  who  saw  Jehovah's  volition  and  power 
behind  all  human  activity  could  the  establishment  of  David's 
throne  and  dynasty  be  regarded  otherwise  than  as  providentially 
ordered;  and  the  original  selection  of  the  son  of  Jesse  and  the 
preservation  and  prosperity  of  his  family  must  have  seemed 
specially  intended  to  promote  Jehovah's  gracious  purposes  to- 
wards Israel.  It  was  natural  therefore  that  the  exalted  hopes 
which  the  prophets  of  this  age  entertained  for  their  people  in 
virtue  of  their  trust  in  Jehovah  should  become  associated  with 
the  advent  of  an  illustrious  prince  of  David's  house;  and  that 

^  /s.  xix.  (either  wholly  or  in  part)  is  regarded  by  certain  scholars  as  non- 
Isaianic  and  of  very  late  origin.     Cf.  Fs.  Ixxxvii.  and  p.  505. 


432  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

the  restoration  and  glorification  of  Israel  should  be  expected  at 
the  hands  of  a  personal  saviour,  who,  like  David,  should  be 
Jehovah's  Messiah  or  Anointed  One.  And  so  long  as  the 
kingdom  lasted  the  figure  of  the  Messianic  King  was  prominent 
in  the  prophetic  utterances.  It  was  only  when  the  external 
circumstances  of  their  country  changed,  and  its  independence 
came  to  an  end,  that  the  figure  disappeared  for  a  time  from  their 
pictures  of  the  future,  and  was  replaced  by  others,  taking  shape 
from  the  altered  conditions  of  their  race. 

In  the  writings  of  the  prophets  of  the  age  now  under  con- 
sideration the  principal  passages  that  deserve  to  be  called 
Messianic  are,  (i)  Am.  ix.ii;  (2)  Hos,  iii.  5 ;  (3)  Is.  vii.  14-16; 
(4)  viii.  5-10;  (5)  ix.  1-7;  (6)  xi.  i~io;  (7)  xxxii.  1-8  ;i  (8) 
Mtc.  v.  2-5.  Of  these  the  passage  in  Amos,  whose  hopes  do  not 
extend  beyond  a  return  of  past  glories,  and  the  recovery  of  the 
foreign  possessions  of  David  (ix.  12),  has  in  view  not  so  much 
the  advent  of  some  particular  ruler  as  the  restoration  of  the 
Davidic  dynasty :  "  In  that  day  will  I  raise  up  the  tabernacle  of 
David  that  has  fallen,  and  close  up  the  breaches  thereof,  and 
I  will  raise  up  his  ruins,  and  I  will  build  it  as  in  the  days  of 
old."  Similarly  the  passage  in  Hosea  refers  to  a  line  of  kings 
rather  than  to  some  individual  sovereign:  "The  children  of 
Israel  shall  abide  many  days  without  king  and  without  prince, 
and  without  sacrifice  and  without  pillar,  and  without  ephod  or 
teraphim  ;  afterward  shall  the  children  of  Israel  return  and  seek 
Jehovah  their  God  and  David  their  king;  and  shall  come  with 
fear  unto  Jehovah  and  to  his  goodness  in  the  latter  days."  But 
in  the  Isaianic  passages  allusion  is  made  to  some  coming  repre- 
sentative of  David's  house,  who  is  marked  out  as  exceptional 
either  by  his  name  or  his  attributes.  The  first  three  of  the 
prophecies  in  question  were  deUvered  in  the  time  of  Ahaz.  As 
has  been  seen,  Ahaz  was  confronted,  soon  after  his  accession,  by 
a  confederation  formed  by  Syria  and  Israel;  but  at  the  height 
of  his  dismay  he  was  met  by  Isaiah,  who  bade  him  not  fear  his 
enemies,  but  put  his  trust  in  Jehovah.  To  reassure  him,  the 
prophet  urged  him  to  ask  a  sign,  and  on  his  declining,  gave  him 

*  The  last  three  passages  cited  from  Isaiah  are  considered  by  Cheyne  to  be 
post -exilic. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  433 

as  a  sign  the  prediction  of  the  birth  of  a  child  in  the  near 
future,^  whom  his  mother  would  name  Immanud  ("God  with 
us"),  and  in  whose  infancy  the  danger  from  Israel  and  Syria 
would  pass  away. 2  As  a  measure  of  the  period  within  which 
the  threatened  peril  was  to  disappear,  the  infancy  of  any  child 
whose  birth  was  approaching  would  have  served  the  prophet's 
immediate  purpose ;  and  as  a  sign  to  convince  Ahaz  that 
Isaiah  was  speaking  with  authority,  the  bestowal  of  the  name  of 
Immanuel  upon  one  such  infant  in  accordance  with  the  prophet's 
prediction  would  have  sufficed.  But  Isaiah's  thoughts  of  the 
future  included  more  than  the  deliverance  of  Judah  from  Syria 
and  Israel ;  and  his  subsequent  words  betray  the  fact  that  he  had 
in  his  mind  a  particular  Child  whose  name  was  suggestive  of  a 
high  destiny  in  store  both  for  himself  and  his  country.  For  the 
moment,  however,  he  did  not  enlarge  upon  this ;  but  proceeded 
to  declare  that  the  deliverance  foretold,  in  consequence  of  Ahaz's 
distrust  and  the  policy  it  led  to,  would  be  accompanied  by 
calamity,  since  an  alliance  with  Assyria,  such  as  Ahaz  contem- 
plated, would  probably  involve  war  with  Egypt,  and  Judah  would 
become  the  battlefield  of  the  two  combatants.  But  in  viii.  5-10 
Immanuel  is  represented  as  the  actual  possessor,  and  by  implica- 
tion the  sovereign,  of  the  land,  which,  as  in  the  previous 
passage,  is  described  as  overrun  by  the  Assyrian  soldiery;  and 
the  significance  of  his  name  is  more  explicitly  declared  to  be  a 
source  of  hope  in  the  midst  of  the  distress,  and  a  pledge  of 
ultimate  deliverance.^  The  events  that  followed  Ahaz's  appeal 
to  Assyria  have  already  been  related;  but  whilst  the  prophet's 
anticipation  of  the  calamities  in  store  for  Northern  Israel  was 

^  Cf.  /  Sam.  ii.  34  (where  the  death  of  Hophni  and  Phinehas  in  one  day  is 
a  sign  of  the  still  more  complete  downfall  in  store  for  Eli's  house  (ver.  31)),  and 
Is.  xxxvii.  30  (where  the  occurrence  of  scarcity  in  the  immediate  future  is  a 
sipt  of  the  eventual  revival  of  prosperity  (ver.  31)).  The  occurrence  of  the 
earlier  event  in  accordance  with  the  prediction  is  expected  to  accredit  the 
prophet's  announcement  of  the  more  remote ;  see  also  Jer.  xliv.  29. 

^  In  Is.  vii.  8  the  period  within  which  Ephraim  is  to  be  broken  in  pieces 
is  stated  to  be  sixty-five  years.  But  the  fact  that  deliverance  at  so  remote  a 
date  would  yield  small  comfort  to  Ahaz,  and  the  position  of  the  words  in 
question  (after  the  reference  to  Damascus  instead  of  after  the  reference  to 
Samaria)  have  led  to  the  rejection  of  the  clause  as  an  interpolation. 

^  So  in  viii.  18  Isaiah  and  his  children,  by  reason  of  their  significant  names 
(see  for  the  latter,  vii.  3,  viii.  3)  are  represented  as  signs. 

2    F 


434  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

verified,  the  expected  encroachment  upon  Judaean  soil  did  not 
then  occur.  It  was  consequently  to  the  Northern  Kingdom  that 
his  thoughts  subsequently  turned.  Isaiah,  though  a  Judaean, 
could  not  be  oblivious  of  the  fact  that  ties  of  kinship  bound 
together  all  the  tribes  of  Jacob ;  and  in  ix.  1-7  it  is  especially 
for  the  districts  of  Zebulun  and  Naphtali,  the  "  Galilee  of  the 
nations,"  which  had  been  devastated  by  Tiglath  Pileser  that  he 
anticipates  a  retrieval  of  their  misfortunes.  The  happy  change 
in  their  condition  he  predicts  will  be  accomplished  by  a  child 
about  to  be  born,  who  is  to  enjoy  a  unique  relationship  to 
Jehovah,  whose  name  shall  be  called  Wofiderful  Counsellor ^ 
Mighty  Gody  Everlasting  Father^  Prince  of  Peace^  who  is  to 
occupy  the  throne  of  David,  and  whose  sovereignty  is  to  be 
righteous,  beneficent,  and  permanent.  The  child  here  described 
is  not  explicitly  identified  with  the  Immanuel  of  vii.  14;  but  his 
birth,  Hke  that  of  Immanuel^  is  expected  to  take  place  at  no 
remote  date,  and  probably  the  same  person  is  intended  in  both 
passages.  Since  he  is  to  sit  on  David's  throne,  he  must  be 
regarded  as  of  royal  descent,  but  scarcely  as  the  offspring  of 
Ahaz  (whose  son  and  heir  Hezekiah,  at  least,  according  to  the 
figures  given  in  2  Kg.  xvi.  2,  xviii.  2,  was  born  before  Ahaz  him- 
self came  to  the  throne).  Of  the  exalted  titles  conferred  upon 
him  the  expression  Mighty  God'^  is  intended  to  designate  him  as 
the  representative  of  Jehovah  (those  who  discharged  royal  or 
judicial  functions  being  generally  considered  to  be  the  Divine 
vice-gerents,  see  Ps.  xlv.  6,  Ex.  xxi.  6  and  marg.,  Ps.  Ixxxii.  6, 
and  cf.  also  Ezek.  xxxi.  11,  Heb.,  i  Sam.  xxviii.  13);  whilst  the 
appellation  Everlasting  Father'^  describes  the  paternal  character 
and  long  duration  of  his  sway. 

But  if  Isaiah  thus  anticipated  that  the  advent  of  an  age  of 
peace  and  happiness  would  follow  upon  the  close  of  the  Syro- 
Israelite  war,  it  is  manifest  that  the  issue  did  not  correspond  to 
his  expectations.  The  prophets,  however,  did  not  think  that  the 
Divine  power  and  goodness  were  exhausted  by  a  single  turn  of 
good  fortune,  nor  felt   that  their  hopes  were   finally  wrecked 

^  Used  as  an  epithet  of  Jehovah  in  x.  21. 

'  It  is  possible  that  this  is  not  the  meaning  intended,  and  that  the  original 
should  be  rendered /aM<;r  of  spoil y  alluding  to  a  career  of  conquest. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  435 

because  they  had  outrun  the  actual  movement  of  events.  Ac- 
cordingly, at  a  later  period,  after  Ahaz  had  been  succeeded  by 
Hezekiah,  when  the  formidable  Assyrian  power  was  threatening 
the  land  from  without,  and  the  condition  of  both  religion  and 
morals  was  far  from  satisfactory  within,  Isaiah  renewed  his  pre- 
diction of  a  deliverer,  and  was  followed  by  his  contemporary 
Micah,  the  three  passages  Is.  xi.  i-io,  xxxii.  1-8,  and  Mic. 
V.  2-5  belonging  to  this  reign.  Isaiah  declared  that  there  should 
com.e  forth  a  scion  from  the  stock  of  Jesse,  who,  invested  with 
the  Divine  attributes  of  wisdom  and  might,  should  inaugurate 
a  golden  age,  in  which  righteousness  and  equity  should  prevail 
amongst  men  and  harmlessness  amongst  the  brute  creation : 
*'  unto  him  shall  the  nations  seek,  and  his  resting-place  shall  be 
glorious"  (xi.  i-io).  Under  his  rule,  the  princes  and  nobles 
would  become  ministers  of  justice  and  bulwarks  against  op- 
pression, the  ignorant  masses  would  grow  enlightened,  and  all 
shams  and  hypocrisies  would  be  revealed  in  their  true  colours 
(xxxii.  1-8).  In  this  last  passage  less  stress  is  laid  upon  the 
individuality  of  the  king  or  his  active  exercise  of  authority  than 
upon  the  condition  of  the  society  of  which  he  is  the  head. 
But  in  Micah  the  Messianic  hope  assumed  a  form  more  akin 
to  Isaiah's  earlier  descriptions.  The  prophet,  comparing  the 
daughter  of  Zion  to  a  woman  in  travail  (iv.  10),  declared  that 
Jehovah  would  give  the  nation  up  "  until  the  time  that  she  which 
travaileth  hath  brought  forth  (possibly  alluding  to  Is,  vii.  14); 
but  that  ultimately  "  out  of  Bethlehem  Ephrathah  (David's  birth- 
place) shall  one  come  forth  .  .  .  who  is  to  be  ruler  in  Israel, 
whose  goings  forth  are  from  of  old,  from  everlasting."  The 
prophet  proceeds  to  describe  him  as  the  shepherd  and  pro- 
tector of  his  people  (v.  4) ;  but  the  individual  reference  is  then 
dropped ;  and  for  the  defence  of  the  country  against  the  Assyrian 
invader  there  are  to  be  raised  up  "seven  shepherds  and  eight 
principal  men."  The  predicted  deliverance  from  the  Assyrians, 
though  not  effected  in  the  manner  or  at  the  time  suggested  by 
the  prophet's  words,  was  in  a  measure  fulfilled  by  the  overthrow 
of  Sennacherib.^     But  of  the  appearance  of  a  descendant  of  the 

*  According  to  the  view  of  Mic.  iv.,  v.  explained  on  p.  428,  the  section 
iv.  1 1 -v.  9  relates  to  a  time  posterior  to  the  predicted  captivity  and  subsequent 
restoration  (iv.  6-10). 


436  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

stock  of  David,  corresponding  to  the  descriptions  of  both  Isaiah 
and  Micah,  the  history  of  the  time  immediately  succeeding  again 
affords  no  indication.  With  the  exception  of  Josiah,  all  the 
kings  who  followed  Hezekiah  on  the  throne  of  Judah  were  either 
weak  or  worthless.  The  fall  of  Assyria,  when  accomplished,  was 
coincident  with  the  rise  of  Babylon ;  and  by  Babylon  the  Jewish 
kingdom  was  finally  extinguished.  It  was  not  until  Jesus  was 
born  of  Mary,  some  seven  centuries  after  Isaiah  and  his  con- 
temporaries wrote,  that  Messianic  prophecy  in  general  received 
(as  Christians  believe)  its  actual  fulfilment.  And  the  distance 
separating  the  anticipations  of  Isaiah  and  others  from  their 
realisation  in  Christ  was  not  measured  by  time  only.  The 
expectations  that  found  expression  in  the  prophecies  just  con- 
sidered were  confined  to  this  world;  the  hopes  they  enshrined 
were  associated  with  dreams  of  national  glory;  to  their  authors 
the  centre  of  interest  was  the  community,  not  individual  souls. 
Nevertheless  something  of  the  external  circumstances  of  Our 
Lord's  life,  the  purpose  of  His  ministry,  and  the  character  of 
His  Person  was  foreshadowed  in  the  writings  of  Isaiah  and 
Micah.  It  was  from  David's  tribe  and  family  that  Christ  drew 
His  lineage  after  the  flesh;  Bethlehem  was  the  scene  of  His 
birth ;  and  Galilee  was  His  home  during  a  large  part  of  His 
earthly  life,  and  the  witness  and  recipient  of  many  of  His  works 
of  mercy.  The  exaltation  of  Israel  among  the  nations  of  the 
world  was  asserted  by  the  prophets  to  be  a  means  to  a  further 
end,  which  embraced  the  extension  of  the  knowledge  of  Jehovah 
over  all  the  earth ;  and  in  this  they  truly  divined  the  very  aim  of 
the  Incarnation  (S.  Jo.  xvii.  1-3).  And  finally,  the  titles  (such 
as  Immanuel  and  Mighty  God)^  applied  to  the  Messiah  as  in- 
vested with  a  Divine  commission,  describe  with  signal  appro- 
priateness the  real  nature  of  the  Eternal  Son. 

3.  The  Age  of  Babylonian  Supremacy. 
The  period  of  Assyrian  predominance  just  considered  extended 
much  beyond  the  lifetime  of  the  prophets  who  have  been  named 
as  contemporary  with  it;  and  Assyrian  influence  again  made 
itself  felt  in  Judah  after  Hezekiah's  death.  His  successor 
Manasseh  not  only  worshipped  Baal,  but  introduced  into  Judah 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  437 

the  planet  worship  which,  as  has  been  noticed,  had  had  votaries 
in  Israel  at  an  earlier  date ;  and  even  built  altars  for  all  the  host 
of  heaven  in  the  two  courts  of  the  Temple  itself.  The  practice 
of  making  children  pass  through  the  fire  also  began  to  obtain, 
perhaps  in  connection  with  divination.  The  favour  shown  to 
foreign  cults  seems  to  have  been  accompanied  by  the  persecution 
of  the  loyal  servants  of  Jehovah  who  protested  against  the 
national  apostasy;  and  Jerusalem  is  described  by  the  historian 
as  being  filled  with  innocent  blood  from  one  end  to  another. 
Indeed,  the  enormities  of  Manasseh  were  such  that  they  are 
regarded  as  having  surpassed  the  iniquities  of  the  Amorites 
(2  Kg.  xxi.  it),  and  as  having  provoked  in  Jehovah  wrath 
against  Judah  which  could  not  be  quenched  {2  Kg.  xxii.  17). 
Even  after  the  misdeeds  of  Jehoiakim  it  was  still  the  sins  of 
Manasseh  that  the  writer  of  Kings  considered  to  have  been  the 
determining  cause  of  the  final  catastrophe  which  Jehovah  brought 
upon  His  people  {2  Kg.  xxiv.  3). 

Assyria  (to  whose  approaching  doom  Nahum's  short  book 
devotes  exclusive  attention)  did  not  fall  before  Babylon  until 
607  B.C.;  but  a  new  epoch  in  the  religious  history  of  the  Hebrew 
people  is  marked  by  the  reign  of  Josiah.  The  reformation  which 
Josiah  instituted,  indeed,  was,  in  its  external  aspect,  only  the 
accomplishment  of  a  scheme  related  to  have  been  contemplated 
and  in  part  executed  by  Hezekiah,  viz.  the  abolition  of  the 
"  high  places  "  and  the  restriction  of  the  national  worship  of 
Jehovah  to  the  central  sanctuary  at  Jerusalem ;  but  it  was 
rendered  remarkable  by  the  circumstances  attending  it.  It  was 
conducted  in  accordance  with  the  directions  of  the  Law-book 
discovered  in  the  Temple,  in  which  the  centralisation  of  worship 
was  represented  as  being  expressly  enjoined  by  Moses.  The 
book,  as  has  been  said,  is  generally  identified  with  Deuteronomy 
(in  whole  or  in  part),  which  purports  to  be  a  record  of  Moses* 
parting  discourse  to  his  countrymen,  wherein  he  reminded  them 
of  their  past  history,  and  exhorted  them  to  a  faithful  observance 
of  Jehovah's  ordinances.  As  already  observed  in  the  Intro- 
duction^ it  reproduces  much  of  the  substance  of  the  "Book  of 
the  Covenant " ;  and  consequently  has  a  certain  claim  to  repre- 
sent the  mind  and  desires  of  Moses,  even  if  it  does  not  rest  upon 


438  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

some  written  memorials  or  traditional  memories  of  the  occasion 
it  professes  to  describe.  On  the  other  hand,  the  requirement 
that  all  feasts  should  be  held,  and  all  sacrifices  be  offered,  at  a 
single  sanctuary,  though  it  may  be  regarded,  perhaps,  as  an 
application  of  Mosaic  principles  to  a  special  emergency,  still 
does  not  appear  to  be  consistent  with  the  actual  legislation  of 
the  great  law-giver  as  exhibited  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant. 
That  code  seems  to  contemplate  the  existence  of  a  plurality 
of  altars,  or  places  of  worship;  and  the  prevailing  practice  in 
historical  times  previous  to  Hezekiah  accords  with  this  assump- 
tion. There  is  a  similar  difference  between  Deuteronomy  and 
the  usage  reflected  in  the  books  of  Judges  and  Kings  in  respect 
of  the  persons  qualified  to  perform  sacrificial  functions.  In 
Deuteronomy  the  priests  are  uniformly  described  as  Levites 
(xvii.  9,  xxi.  5),  the  tribe  of  Levi  is  related  to  have  been 
separated  from  the  others  for  the  purpose  of  ministering  to 
Jehovah  (x.  8),  and  it  is  directed  that  its  members  are  to  be 
maintained  from  the  offerings  made  to  Jehovah,  and  to  share 
with  the  poor  and  needy  the  tithe  of  the  third  year  (xviii.  1-5, 
xxvi.  12).  But  it  has  been  shown  that  there  are  numerous 
instances  in  the  historical  books  of  sacrifice  being  offered  by 
persons  belonging  to  other  tribes  than  Levi,  and  that  there 
is  nothing  to  indicate  that  there  was  anything  irregular  or  ille- 
gitimate in  such  proceedings,  though  at  the  same  time  it  is  clear 
that  in  connection  with  priestly  duties  a  preference  was  enter- 
tained for  Levites  over  other  persons,  whether  the  name  describes 
members  of  a  tribe  or  a  sacerdotal  body.  Again,  Deuteronomy 
prohibits  the  erection  of  pillars  in  connection  with  the  worship 
of  Jehovah  (xvi.  22);  whereas  Moses  appears  to  have  set  up 
pillars  beside  the  altar  which  he  constructed  at  the  foot  of  Sinai 
{Ex.  xxiv.  4),  and  the  Book  of  the  Covenant  only  directs  the 
destruction  of  pillars  dedicated  to  the  gods  of  the  Canaanites 
(Ex.  xxiii.  24,  xxxiv.  13).  Thus  Deuterofiomy  in  regard  to  its 
most  distinctive  ceremonial  laws  appears  to  depart  from  the 
customs  not  only  of  Mosaic,  but  even  later  times,  and  to  be  the 
production  of  an  age  long  subsequent  to  that  of  Moses.  And 
if  the  continuous  disregard  of  the  regulation  respecting  the 
centralisation  of  worship  by  law-abiding  kings  can  be  taken  to 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  439 

indicate  its  non-existence,  the  earliest  date  to  which  Deuteronomy 
can  be  assigned  is  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  if  not  the  opening  years 
of  Josiah. 

But  if  on  this  ground  Deuteronomy  must  be  regarded,  in 
respect  of  its  characteristic  features,  as  the  product  of  the  age 
now  under  consideration,  its  ethical  and  religious  conceptions 
may  be  drawn  upon  to  illustrate  the  spirit  of  the  age  as  embodied 
in  one  of  its  noblest  compositions.  Naturally  many  of  the 
thoughts  respecting  Jehovah  which  first  found  explicit  expression 
in  the  prophets  of  the  preceding  age  recur  in  Deuteronomy  ;  and 
in  it  particular  prominence  is  given  to  His  supremacy  and  in- 
comparableness,  and  to  His  exclusive  claim  upon  the  devotion 
of  Israel  (x.  17,  vi.  4).  Thus  Jehovah's  soUtary  and  unique 
godhead  is  asserted :  He  alone  is  God  and  there  is  none  else 
(iv.  35,  39,  xxxii.  39).  The  sun,  moon,  and  stars,  which  are 
worshipped  by  other  nations,  have  been  allotted  to  them  by  Him 
(iv.  19,  cf.  xxix.  26,  xxxii.  8  (LXX.));  but  Israel  He  has  chosen 
to  be  a  peculiar  people  unto  Himself  (vii.  6),  and  for  them 
He  feels  a  deep  love  (vii.  8,  x.  15).  Hence  the  worship  of 
other  gods  by  Israel  is  ingratitude  as  well  as  folly.  Jehovah 
has  done  great  and  terrible  things  for  them  (x.  21-22)  and  given 
them  righteous  statutes  beyond  any  that  other  nations  possess 
(iv.  8);  whereas  the  gods  for  whom  they  may  be  tempted  to 
forsake  Him  are  the  work  of  men's  hands,  wood  and  stone, 
destitute  of  sense  (iv.  28)  and  no  gods  (xxxii.  21).  Accordingly 
the  strongest  possible  protests  are  entered  against  apostasy  and 
idolatry  (iv.  15-19,  xii.  29-31);  the  severest  retribution  is 
affirmed  to  be  in  store  for  such  wickedness  (vi.  14-15,  viii.  19-20, 
xi.  16-17);  ^"<^  death  is  directed  to  be  inflicted  upon  anyone 
who  is  guilty  of  it  or  incites  the  people  to  it  (xiii.  5,  xvii.  2-7). 

But  the  most  noteworthy  features  of  the  religious  and  moral 
teaching  of  Deuteronomy  are  its  humanity  and  its  spirituality, 
(i)  The  principles  of  social  kindhness  laid  down  in  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant  {Ex.  xx.-xxiii.)  are  both  expanded  and  enforced. 
Benevolence  and  generosity  are  enjoined  towards  those  classes 
in  the  community  which  especially  need  such,  like  the  poor 
and  the  stranger  (xv.  7-8,  ir,  x.  19,  xxiv.  19-22).  Kindness 
is  to  be  shown  to  servants  (v.  14),  who,  when  manumitted  in  the 


440  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Sabbatical  year,  are  to  be  furnished  liberally  by  their  masters 
(xv.  13-14).  Neighbourliness  is  to  be  shown  in  restoring  strayed 
cattle,  or  lost  possessions,  to  their  owners  (xxii.  1-4).  Con- 
sideration is  to  be  displayed  in  commercial  dealings;  payments 
to  hired  labourers  are  to  be  prompt  (xxiv.  14-15);  pledges  for 
money  lent  are  to  be  exacted  with  due  regard  to  the  feelings 
of  the  borrower;  usury  is  not  to  be  required  from  a  fellow- 
countryman;  and  a  garment  needed  for  the  night,  if  taken  as 
security,  is  to  be  restored  at  sunset  (xxiv.  10-13).  Similar 
considerateness  is  directed  to  be  observed  towards  the  newly- 
married,  and  persons  recently  possessed  of  a  house  or  an  estate 
(who  are  to  be  exempted  from  military  service  for  a  time 
(xx.  5-7,  cf.  xxiv.  5)),  as  well  as  towards  a  female  captive  taken 
in  war  (who  is  to  be  allowed  to  mourn  her  parents  for  a  full 
month  before  she  becomes  the  wife  of  her  captor  (xxi.  10-14)). 
A  convicted  malefactor  is  not  to  be  subjected  to  a  measure  of 
punishment  calculated  to  degrade  him  ;  and  the  number  of  stripes 
that  may  be  inflicted  is  limited  to  forty  (xxv.  1-3).  Though  the 
population  of  the  Canaanite  cities  is  to  be  exterminated,  yet 
hostile  towns  of  other  nations  are  to  be  summoned  to  surrender 
before  they  are  assaulted,  and  if  they  submit  their  citizens  are 
to  be  spared  (xx.  10-18).  Even  animals  are  to  be  kindly 
treated :  the  ox  that  treads  out  the  corn  is  not  to  be  muzzled 
(xxv.  4) ;  and  it  is  forbidden  to  take  from  a  nest  the  mother 
bird  and  its  young  ones  together  (xxii.  6-7).  Many  of  these 
commands  are  enforced  by  reference  to  Jehovah's  goodness 
towards  His  people :  the  Israehtes  are  expected  to  be  kind 
and  thoughtful  towards  servants  and  bondmen  because  they 
themselves  were  once  bond-servants  in  Egypt,  whence  Jehovah 
had  so  graciously  delivered  them  (v.  15,  xv.  15,  xxiv.  18,  22). 
And  (2)  not  only  are  prevalent  conceptions  of  outward  duties 
enlarged  and  purified,  but  the  greatest  importance  is  attached 
to  the  inward  springs  of  conduct.  It  is  realised  that  the  only 
security  for  thorough  obedience  to  Jehovah's  laws  is  to  be  found 
in  a  heartfelt  desire  to  serve  Him ;  and  the  writer  of  the  book 
never  tires  of  insisting  upon  the  need  of  love  towards  God 
(vi.  5,  x.  12,  xi.  T,  13,  22,  xix.  9).  This  "inwardness"  so  con- 
spicuous in  Deuteronomy  manifests  itself  likewise  in  the  command 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  441 

to  extend  to  the  heart  the  circumcision  legally  imposed  on  the 
flesh  (x.  16,  cf.  Jer.  iv.  4).  By  such  an  injunction  everything 
that  obstructed  Israel's  receptiveness  towards  Jehovah's  com- 
mands was  required  to  be  discarded,  that  obedience  to  them 
might  be  both  prompt  and  sincere. 

The  prophets  who  lived  during  this  period,  and  whose  writings 
throw  further  light  upon  the  stage  in  religious  and  moral  develop- 
ment which  had  by  this  been  attained  are  Nahum  (previously 
alluded  to),  Zephaniah,  Jeremiah,  Habakkuk,  Obadiah,  and 
Ezekiel.  Ezekiel's  prophetic  career  was  continued  far  into  the 
Exile,  so  that  he  belongs  to  the  following  age  as  well  as  this. 
But  as  parts  of  his  book  (xxix.  17-21,  xl.-xlviii.)  were  composed 
at  least  fifteen  years  later  than  the  rest,  these  portions  of  his  work 
may  be  detached  from  the  remainder  and  reserved  for  con- 
sideration among  the  Exilic  writings,  whilst  the  residue  (i.-xxxix. 
(om.  xxix.  17-21))  may  be  treated  as  belonging  to  the  age 
now  under  review.  For  the  better  understanding  of  the  additions 
which  the  prophets  named  above  made  to  the  religious  ideas 
of  their  race,  it  will  be  best  to  follow  the  order  previously 
observed,  and  to  consider  in  turn  what  they  contributed  to 
the  problems  raised  respecting  (i)  the  character  and  require- 
ments of  Jehovah,  (2)  the  aim  and  purpose  of  His  relations 
with  Israel. 

I.  {a)  In  the  prophets  of  the  8th  century  the  predominant  de- 
mand put  forward  in  Jehovah's  name  had  been  civil  justice  and 
social  humanity.  Sensuous  modes  of  worship,  indeed,  received 
severe  condemnation,  but  the  national  fault  that  most  called  for 
condemnation  was  the  union  of  ceremonial  scrupulousness  with 
moral  licence.  But  the  7th  century  witnessed  in  Judah  a  vio- 
lent reaction  from  such  religious  reforms  as  were  attempted  by 
Hezekiah,  and  in  consequence  the  complaints  of  contemporary 
prophets  were  directed  increasingly  against  not  merely  the  formal- 
ism (see  Jer.  vi.  19-20,  vii.  22-24)  but  the  actual  apostasy  of 
their  countrymen.  As  in  Deuteronomy  it  is  against  the  worship 
of  other  gods  than  Jehovah  that  the  nation  is  most  impressively 
warned,  so  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  it  is  for  this  that  the  people 
are  most  frequently  condemned  (see  Jer.  i.  16,  v.  7,  xi.  13, 
xix.  4-5,  xliv.  3,  Ezek.  vi.  13,  xiv.  3-4,  xxii.  4).     That  in  their 


442  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

polemic  against  such  worship  these  prophets  had  the  cause  of 

morality  as  well  as  of  religion  at  heart  is  clear  from  their  explicit 
denunciation  of  social  wrongs  {Jer,  ix.  2-6,  xxii.  13-17,  Ezek, 
xviii.  5-9,  xxii.  6-12).  But  they  were  led  to  emphasise  the  ex- 
clusiveness  of  the  service  exacted  by  Jehovah  rather  than  its 
moral  nature  partly  in  consequence  of  the  outburst  of  idolatry 
in  Manasseh's  reign,  and  partly  from  the  fuller  consciousness  of 
Jehovah's  unique  dignity  which  they  had  inherited  from  their 
predecessors.  In  rebuking  their  countrymen  for  abandoning  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  for  that  of  other  deities  the  prophets  en- 
larged upon  the  folly  displayed,  for  such  gods  were  no  gods 
{Jer.  ii.  11,  xvi.  20),  who  could  not  profit  them,  nor  deliver  them 
from  trouble  (xi.  12,  Hab.  ii.  18).  And  the  ingratitude  involved 
called  for  equal  animadversion.  Idolatry  more  than  any  other 
sin  appeared  to  outrage  \}ii&  personal  \\^%  existing  between  Jehovah 
and  His  people ;  and  accordingly  by  Jeremiah  as  by  Hosea  the 
love  and  affection  of  Jehovah  for  Israel  is  contrasted  with  the 
disloyalty  of  the  latter  to  its  God  (ii.  4  foil.).  Nevertheless 
the  prophets'  sense  of  the  Divine  tenderness  was  sometimes 
almost  overpowered  and  obliterated  as  they  realised  the  Divine 
majesty  and  holiness ;  and  by  Ezekiel,  at  least,  Jehovah's  conduct 
towards  the  chosen  race  was  conceived  as  dictated  by  a  different 
motive  than  His  loving-kindness.  His  past  mercies  towards 
offending  Israel  were  explained  as  due  to  His  desire  that  His 
name  should  not  be  profaned  among  the  nations,  who,  if  His 
people  had  not  been  delivered  from  their  oppressors,  might  have 
attributed  it  to  His  lack  of  power  {Ezek.  xx.  9,  14,  22).  And 
the  promotion  of  the  Divine  glory  (it  is  declared)  will  similarly 
govern  and  direct  God's  deaUngs  in  the  time  to  come  (xxxvi.  22 
foil.).  It  is  in  order  that  Israel  may  know  Him  to  be  Jehovah 
that  He  will  both  punish  and  preserve  it  (vi.  7,  vii.  4,  xx.  44). 
So  superlative  and  transcendent  is  His  dignity  that  His  actions 
cannot  be  accounted  for  by  any  motive  external  to  Himself. 

(p)  The  prophets  of  the  preceding  age  had  affirmed  Jehovah 
to  be  the  moral  Judge  of  all  nations  indifferently,  not  of 
Israel  alone ;  but  the  group  of  prophets  now  under  considera- 
tion asserted  the  equally  weighty  truth  that  He  is  the  Judge 
not   of   nationaUties   only,    but   of   individual  men.      Amongst 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  443 

the  early  Israelites,  as  amongst  primitive  peoples  generally,  the 
sense  of  individuality  was  defective;  and  the  independent  value 
of  each  separate  soul  was  merged  and  lost  in  the  importance  of 
the  family  and  the  community.  Consequently  children  were 
often  involved  in  the  fate  of  their  parents  (see/osk.  vii.  24,  2  Sam. 
xxi.  5-6,  cf.  2  Kg.  ix.  26)  without  any  consciousness  of  violated 
justice  making  itself  felt ;  and  the  same  inability  to  discriminate 
between  individual  and  tribal  guiltiness  was  at  the  root  of  the 
exterminating  wars  practised  by  both  the  Hebrews  and  their 
neighbours.  Similarly,  the  Divine  covenant  with  Israel  was 
contracted  with  the  nation^  the  individual  units  of  which  the 
nation  was  constituted  sharing  in  it  in  virtue  of  their  common 
descent  and  their  common  dwelling-place.  The  prosperity  pro- 
duced by  bountiful  seasons  and  plenteous  harvests  benefited  the 
evil  few  as  well  as  the  many  good  \  whilst  the  agents  of  the  Divine 
judgments,  whether  human  foes  or  physical  calamities,  over- 
whelmed not  only  the  wicked  but  the  righteous  minority  in 
their  midst.  The  solidarity  uniting  the  several  members  of  a 
people  or  race  was  expressly  recognised  in  the  assertions  put 
forward  by  lawgiver  and  prophet  concerning  God's  government 
of  mankind  {Ex.  xx.  5,  i  Sam.  iii.  13);  and  appeal  was  made  to 
the  interest  that  one  generation  had  in  the  fortunes  of  another 
(Ex.  XX.  12).  But  in  the  course  of  time  there  gradually  grew  up, 
in  connection  with  the  judicial  punishments  imposed  by  human 
authority,  a  sense  of  the  rights  of  every  individual  to  be  account- 
able for  no  more  than  his  own  sins :  and  by  the  time  of  king 
Amaziah  of  Judah  it  ceased  to  be  the  custom  to  put  to  death 
children  for  the  offence  of  their  fathers  (see  2  Kg.  xiv.  6,  cf. 
Deut.  xxiv.  16).  And  in  consequence,  dissatisfaction  began  to 
be  manifested  with  the  principles  hitherto  asserted  to  rule  God's 
dealings  with  men,  and  it  was  complained  that  in  the  Divine 
visitations  the  law  of  justice,  as  now  understood,  was  not  ob- 
served :  "  the  fathers  had  eaten  sour  grapes,  and  the  children's 
teeth  were  set  on  edge."  It  was  in  answer  to  this  plea  that 
Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  afiirmed  that  thenceforward  there  should 
be  no  more  occasion  for  the  proverb;  everyone  should  die  for 
his  own  iniquity ;  every  man  that  should  eat  the  sour  grapes,  his 
teeth  should  be  set  on  edge  {Jer.  xxxi.  29-30,  Ezek.  xviii.  2-4). 


444  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

They  asserted  that  God  entered  into  relations  with  each  person, 
independently  of  the  nation  as  a  whole,  and  would  hold  every 
man  responsible  for  his  own  individual  conduct.  Put  in  this 
unqualified  way,  the  statement  is,  no  doubt,  one-sided  and 
exaggerated.  But  it  may  be  assumed  that  the  prophets  did  not 
actually  mean  that  the  collective  responsibiUty  of  a  community 
for  the  conduct  of  part  of  its  members  would  altogether  cease : 
Ezekiel,  indeed,  expressly  contemplates  the  opposite  (xxi.  3). 
Their  language  was  really  intended  to  meet  the  special  needs 
of  their  contemporaries,  and  counterbalanced  one  extreme  by 
another.  In  addition  to  their  desire  to  reformulate  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Divine  government  of  the  world  in  accordance  with 
the  advance  in  ethical  sentiment,  they  made  it  their  immediate 
object  to  raise  the  spirits  of  the  people,  and  to  promote  their 
reform  by  freeing  them  from  an  extravagant  sense  of  the  conse- 
quences of  past  transgressions,  and  the  hopeless  feeling  that  they 
were  permanently  under  the  Divine  wrath  (see  Ezek.  xxxiii.  lo-i  i). 
Ezekiel,  in  particular,  passed  from  a  denial  that  the  father's 
iniquity  involved  the  death  of  the  son  (xviii.  14-17)  to  a  denial 
that  a  man's  own  past  offences  need  bring  upon  him  irrevocable 
punishment  {ib.  21-22).  Amendment  was  in  his  power;  and  in 
turning  from  his  misdeeds  he  could  save  his  soul  alive  {ib.  27-28, 
30-32).  The  same  conviction  was,  of  course,  the  unexpressed 
assumption  underlying  all  previous  prophetic  calls  to  repentance ; 
and  to  this  extent  was  no  novelty.  What  was  fresh  in  the  teach- 
ing of  the  prophets  of  this  period  was  the  explicitness  with 
which  they  declared  the  truth  that  God's  attitude  to  a  man  was 
not  wholly  determined  by  the  family  or  society  of  which  he  was 
by  birth  or  domicile  a  member,  but  that  He  stood  in  a  personal 
and  individual  relation  to  him.  The  reconciliation  of  such  a 
truth  with  the  facts  of  man's  corporate  life  and  their  consequences 
only  came  into  view  later. 

{c)  In  regard  to  the  moral  reformation  which  it  was  the  main 
object  of  the  prophets  to  promote,  it  had  been  generally  held 
and  taught  that  the  act  of  turning  from  evil  to  righteousness, 
from  sin  to  God,  was  within  the  power  of  the  sinful  themselves 
to  achieve.  A  beUef  in  the  possibility  of  human  self-determina- 
tion in  matters  of  conduct  is  implied  in  every  hortatory  appeal 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  445 

and  every  measure  of  discipline;  and  such  finds  expression 
in  various  prophetic  writings  of  all  periods  (Hos.  xii.  6,  xiv.  i, 
Jer.  iii.  12,  14,  xxv.  5,  Ezek.  xiv.  6,  xviii.  30-32  etc.).  But 
in  the  prophets  of  this  age  there  appears  by  the  side  of  this 
confidence  in  the  capability  of  men  to  reform  themselves  a 
conviction  that  the  overthrow  of  evil  in  collective  Israel  could 
only  be  effected  by  the  immediate  agency  of  God  Himself.  For 
the  extinction  of  the  corrupt  habits  that  had  so  long  prevailed 
there  was  required  the  direct  influence  of  Divine  grace  upon 
the  hearts  of  the  people.  By  Jeremiah  the  nation  is  represented 
as  crying  to  Jehovah  "  Turn  thou  me,  and  I  shall  be  turned " 
{Jer.  xxxi.  18,  cf.  Lam.  v.  21),  and  Jehovah  is  described  as 
declaring  that  He  would  give  to  them  a  heart  to  know  Him  {Jer. 
xxiv.  7).  The  days  were  to  come  when  Jehovah  would  make 
a  new  covenant  with  His  people  and  would  put  His  law  in  their 
inward  parts,  and  in  their  heart  would  write  it,  so  that  they 
should  no  more  teach  every  man  his  brother,  saying,  *  Know 
Jehovah,'  for  they  should  all  know  Him  {Jer.  xxxi.  33-34, 
cf.  xxxii.  39-40).  Ezekiel  asserts  the  same  fact  in  slightly 
different  language.  "A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you,  and  a 
new  spirit  will  I  put  within  you ;  and  I  will  take  away  the  stony 
heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you  a  heart  of  flesh. 
And  I  will  put  my  spirit  within  you,  and  cause  you  to  walk 
in  my  statutes"  {Ezek.  xxxvi.  26-7;  cf.  xi.  19-20,  xxxvii.  14, 
xxxix.  29).  This  conception  was  a  distinct  advance  upon  any- 
thing that  had  gone  before  it.  There  had  been  earlier  prophets 
who  had  given  expression  to  Jehovah's  graciousness,  and  had 
voiced  not  the  Divine  laws  only  but  the  Divine  love  in  its 
pleadings  with  an  unworthy  people.  But  in  the  passages  quoted 
above  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  anticipate  that  God  will  not  be 
content  to  wait  the  uncertain  issue  of  His  prophets'  pleas,  but 
that  He  will  actively  dispose  His  people  to  respond  to  His 
commands  and  obey  His  precepts.  What  idea  the  prophets 
entertained  of  the  process  and  operation  of  Divine  grace  or  how 
they  reconciled  it  with  human  responsibility  is  not  apparent. 
Their  description  of  an  internal  change  produced  in  men's 
hearts  by  the  immediate  influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit  did  not, 
it  may  be  presumed,   exclude   the  lessons   of  experience,   the 


446  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

exhortations  of  preachers,  or  the  conclusions  of  reflection. 
What  they  were  chiefly  concerned  to  assert  was  the  belief  that 
a  reformation  which  the  instruction  and  discipline  of  several 
centuries  had  failed  to  eff'ect  would  be  fully  consummated  in 
the  near  future.  And  this  belief  was,  in  one  respect,  sur- 
prisingly verified.  During  the  relatively  brief  period  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity,  the  Jewish  people  passed  through  a  change 
of  thought  and  feeling  in  regard  to  idolatry  which  almost 
extinguished  their  inclination  towards  it,  and  left  them  with 
quite  other  tendencies  than  those  which  they  had  displayed 
in  preceding  times.  Their  earlier  fickleness  in  adopting  alien 
modes  of  worship  yielded  place  gradually  to  a  rigidness  in  inter- 
preting Jehovah's  law,  and  a  tenacity  in  maintaining  it,  which 
rendered  their  subsequent  history  a  remarkable  contrast  to  their 
past. 

2.  (a)  The  belief  entertained  by  previous  prophets  that 
Jehovah's  interest  in  Israel  was  not  only  consistent  with  His 
punishing  their  offences  but  actually  demanded  it,  was  shared 
by  their  successors;  and  their  expectation  that  a  Divine  judg- 
ment awaited  their  countrymen  became  in  the  minds  of  the 
prophets  of  this  age  a  still  more  confident  assurance.  To 
Jeremiah  and  his  contemporaries  the  state  of  the  nation 
appeared  beyond  remedy;  the  time  for  intercession  had  gone 
by  (/^.  vii.  1 6,  xi.  14),  and  they  were  convinced  that  the 
punishment  which  had  so  long  been  threatening  it  was  now 
certain  and  immediate.  Zephaniah,  indeed  (who  wrote  before 
the  fall  of  Nineveh  and  the  Assyrian  power),  seems  to  have 
thought  that  a  remnant  of  the  people,  humbled  and  purified, 
would  survive  the  coming  judgment  and  be  left  in  possession 
of  their  own  soil  (see  ii.  3,  iii.  11-13).  But  Jeremiah,  a  little 
later,  anticipated  and  predicted  a  more  complete  overthrow 
(see  XV.  13-14,  xvi.  11-13,  xvii.  4).  Jerusalem,  which  Isaiah  had 
rightly  maintained  to  be  impregnable  when  assailed  by  Assyria, 
was  no  more  to  be  exempted  from  the  general  ruin  which  was 
to  overtake  the  country :  it  was  to  be  captured  and  depopulated 
by  the  Babylonians  (/er.  xx.  4-6).  And  whereas  Isaiah  had 
exhausted  all  the  resources  of  his  eloquence  to  fortify  the  hearts 
of  his  fellow-citizens  when  the  army  of  Sennacherib  was  before 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  447 

the  walls,  Jeremiah  was  so  assured  that  a  different  issue  would 
attend  the  siege  of  the  city  by  Nebuchadrezzar  that  (as  has 
been  seen)  he  urged  all  who  could  to  fall  away  to  the  besiegers 
(xxi.  8-10) ;  and  in  consequence  was  charged  with  unnerving 
those  who  were  responsible  for  the  city's  defence.  The 
language  of  Ezekiel  in  Babylon,  which,  though  addressed  to 
the  exiles  who  were  taken  thither  with  Jehoiachin,  had  as  its 
object  those  still  remaining  in  Jerusalem,  and  was  doubtless 
communicated  to  them,  was  of  similar  tenor  (see  c.  xii.,  xiv.  22, 
XV.  6-8).  But  the  prophets  of  this  period,  though  predicting 
that  the  inhabitants  of  the  capital  as  well  as  of  the  country  were 
to  be  carried  forth  into  a  foreign  land,  yet  believed,  like  their 
predecessors,  in  the  recovery  of  a  remnant  of  Jehovah's  people. 
They  contemplated  a  spiritual  reformation  in  Israel,  and  as  the 
consequence  of  this,  the  nation's  return  to  its  own  soil  {Jer.  xvi. 
14-21,  xxiii.  3-4,  xxiv.  6-7,  Zeph.  ii.  7,  iii.  19-20;^  cf.  Deut, 
xxx.  i-io).  And  in  proportion  to  the  greater  positiveness  of 
their  predictions  of  the  city's  fall  and  its  people's  captivity,  more 
definite  assertions  are  made  respecting  the  Umits  of  the  Exile, 
the  eventual  overthrow  of  the  conquering  power,  and  the  re- 
lease of  those  whom  it  held  in  thrall  {Jer.  xxv.  11-12,  xxix.  10, 
xxvii.  7,  22,  Ezek.  xxviii.  25-26,  xxxiv.  11-16,  xxxvi.  24,  xxxix. 
25-29).  The  term  fixed  for  the  duration  of  the  captivity  by 
Jeremiah  is  seventy  years  i^Jer.  xxv.  11),  and  the  term  named 
by  Ezekiel  is  forty  years  {Ezek.  iv.  6),  both  being  conventional 
numbers  for  a  considerable  but  limited  period.  As  a  matter 
of  fact  the  Exile  lasted  sixty  years  after  the  first  deportation  of 
prisoners,  and  only  fifty  after  the  final  sack  of  the  city.  It  was 
in  those  who  endured  this  period  of  discipline  and  correction 
that  the  prophets  placed  their  hopes  for  the  future  of  their 
nation  {Jer.  xxiv.  2-10),  though,  as  has  been  said,  the  reforma- 
tion effected  in  them  is  ascribed  less  to  the  purifying  influence 
of  adversity  than  to  the  immediate  act  of  God  upon  their  hearts 

^  Zeph.  iii.  14-20  is  by  some  separated  from  the  rest  of  the  book  and 
assigned  to  the  period  of  the  Exile,  on  the  ground  of  its  dissimilarity  of  tone, 
inasmuch  as  the  early  part  of  the  prophecy  foretells  that  a  few  righteous  will 
in  their  own  land  escape  the  coming  judgment  (ii.  3,  iii.  11-13),  whereas 
this  section  is  a  triumphant  announcement  (like  2  Is.)  of  the  recovery  of  the 
nation  from  exile.     Yet  a  return  from  captivity  seems  predicted  in  ii.  7, 


448  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

{Jer.  xxiv.  7,  xxxi.  33,  xxxii.  40).  In  their  predictions  of  the 
return  of  the  exiles  to  their  home,  the  prophets  reiterated  the 
belief  of  their  predecessors  regarding  the  future  reunion  of  the 
two  sections  of  the  house  of  Jacob  {Jer.  iii.  18,  Ezek.  xxxvii. 
15-22).  As  Judaeans,  they  naturally  viewed  Zion  as  the  sanc- 
tuary of  the  reconciled  tribes  ;  and  thither  Jeremiah  contem- 
plated that  the  children  of  Ephraim  would  gather  to  seek 
Jehovah  (xxxi.  6). 

{b)  But  though  the  thoughts  of  these  prophets  were  directed 
principally  towards  the  destiny  of  their  own  people,  they  like- 
wise included  within  their  range  the  future  of  the  world  at  large. 
The  anticipations  formed  respecting  this  partly  took  place  under 
pressure  of  certain  moral  difficulties  arising  from  the  deeper 
consciousness,  now  prevailing,  that  Jehovah  was  the  Judge  of 
all  mankind.  In  the  light  of  the  more  comprehensive  views 
about  Jehovah's  relation  to  the  Gentile  world  which  were  initiated 
by  the  prophets  of  the  8th  century,  it  was  no  longer  possible  to 
rest  content  with  the  belief  that  God  used  them  as  agents  for  the 
discipline  of  Israel,  independently  of  their  own  conduct.  It 
was  seen  that  justice  and  mercy  were  demanded  from  them  as 
well  as  from  the  chosen  people.  Reflection,  however,  failed 
to  discover  any  moral  superiority  in  the  ministers  of  Divine 
vengeance  over  the  nation  whom  they  chastised,  so  that 
Habakkuk,  when  the  Chaldeans  were  raised  up  to  punish  Judah 
for  its  sins,  could  enquire  of  the  Almighty  why  He  held  His 
peace  when  the  wicked  swallowed  up  the  man  that  was  more 
righteous  than  he  {Hab.  i.  13).^  Hence  the  prophets  began 
to  take  refuge  from  their  perplexity  in  the  thought  that  God's 
holiness  would  be  vindicated  by  a  judgment  of  the  heathen 
even  more  signal  than  that  which  had  overtaken  Israel.  But 
a  noteworthy  difference  of  attitude  towards  heathen  nations  is 
observable   among   the   various   prophets   who    belong    to    this 

*  In  Hab.  i.  it  is  most  natural  to  take  the  wicked  in  ver.  4  to  be  the  un- 
righteous Israelites,  and  in  ver.  13  to  be  the  Chaldeans  (Babylonians).  But 
some  scholars  regard  the  word  in  both  verses  as  describing  a  power  (Assyria, 
or  more  probably  Egypt,  after  the  defeat  and  death  of  Josiah  at  Megiddo)  that 
was  oppressing  Israel  (the  righteous),  to  avenge  whom  Jehovah  was  raising  up 
the  Chaldeans;  though  this  renders  it  necessary  to  transfer  i.  5-II  from  its 
present  position  and  to  place  it  after  ii.  4. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  449 

period.  On  the  one  hand,  some,  whilst  announcing  a  judg- 
ment to  be  in  store  for  the  peoples  that  distressed  Israel, 
anticipated  the  admission  of  the  Gentile  world  generally  to 
the  knowledge  and  favour  of  Jehovah.  Jeremiah,  for  instance, 
whilst  predicting  woe  for  the  various  peoples  of  Palestine, 
Arabia,  and  Egypt,  of  which  Babylon  was  to  be  the  author 
and  eventually  the  sharer  (xxv.  15-31,  xxvii.  i-ii),  and  whilst 
delivering  separate  oracles  of  sinister  import  against  Egypt, 
Philistia,  Moab,  Ammon,  Edom,  Damascus,  Kedar,  and  Elam 
(xlvi.-xlix.),i  yet  declared  that  all  nations  should  be  gathered 
unto  Jerusalem  in  the  name  of  Jehovah  (iii.  1 7) ;  that  they  should 
bless  themselves  in  Him,  and  in  Him  should  glory  (iv.  2) ;  that 
to  Him  they  should  come  from  the  ends  of  the  earth  and  say,  "Our 
fathers  have  inherited  naught  but  lies,  even  vanity  and  things 
wherein  there  is  no  profit"  (xvi.  19);  and  that  if  the  evil 
neighbours  of  Israel  should  learn  the  ways  of  Jehovah's  chosen, 
and  to  swear  by  His  name,  even  as  they  had  taught  Israel  to 
swear  by  Baal,  they  should  be  built  up  in  the  midst  of  His 
people  (xii.  14-16).  Zephaniah,  too,  did  not  regard  the  judg- 
ment, which  he  predicted  would  overtake  certain  foreign  nations, 
as  one  of  vengeance  only.  Though  the  wrongs  and  insults 
endured  by  Israel  at  the  hands  of  its  adversaries  in  Philistia, 
Moab,  Ammon,  Ethiopia  (  =  Egypt),  and  Assyria  were  to  be 
avenged  (ii.  7-15),  the  punishment  inflicted  would  reclaim  the 
nations  from  their  idolatry,  for  Jehovah  would  famish  all  the 
gods  of  the  earth,  and  men  should  worship  Him,  every  one  from 
his  place  (ver.  11).  It  was  His  determination  to  assemble  the 
kingdoms,  and  to  pour  upon  them  His  indignation ;  then  would 
He  turn  to  the  peoples  a  pure  language,  that  they  might  all  call 
upon  the  name  of  Jehovah  to  serve  Him  with  one  consent 
(iii.  8-9).  On  the  other  hand,  Obadiah,  in  describing  the 
punishment  which  was  ultimately  to  overtake  Edom  for  its  un- 
brotherly  triumph  over  the  downfall  of  Judah,  confined  his 
forecast  solely  to  the  vindictive  aspect  of  the  approaching  doom, 
to  the  exclusion  of  any  thoughts  of  correction  and  reformation. 

^  To  the  oracles  against  Moab,  Ammon,  and  Elam  there  is  attached  a 
promise  of  restoration  from  the  captivity  with  which  they  are  threatened,  but 
in  the  case  of  the  first  two  it  is  omitted  by  the  LXX.  (B). 


450  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

"  The  house  of  Jacob  (he  declares)  shall  be  a  fire,  and  the  house 
of  Joseph  a  flame,  and  the  house  of  Esau  for  stubble,  and  they 
shall  burn  among  them  and  devour  them  and  there  shall  not  be 
any  remaining  to  the  house  of  Esau."  Judah  is  to  be  the  agent 
of  its  own  revenge,  and  is  to  recompense  itself  for  its  humilia- 
tion and  calamities  by  possessing  the  lands  of  its  jealous  neigh- 
bours. Similarly  Ezekiel  (xxv.-xxxii.,  xxxv.)  predicts  that  Jehovah 
will  take  vengeance  upon  Edom  by  the  hand  of  His  people 
for  having  vented  its  spite  against  Judah ;  that  punishment  is 
to  befall  the  Philistines,  Moab,  Ammon,  and  Tyre,  either  for 
taking  advantage  of,  or  rejoicing  over,  Judah's  misfortunes ;  and 
that  Jehovah's  wrath  is  likewise  awaiting  Egypt  for  its  pride 
and  insincerity,  though  a  promise  is  added  that  after  forty  years, 
it  will  be  restored,  humbled  and  diminished.  But  Ezekiel  also 
has  a  description  of  a  great  overthrow  of  heathen  (predicted  by 
former  prophets,  cf.  Zeph.  iii.  8,  Mic.  iv.  ii),  which  is  to  happen 
in  the  distant  future,  and  which,  whilst  on  a  much  m.ore  colossal 
scale  than  anything  depicted  previously,  breathes  a  still  harsher 
spirit.  In  the  latter  daySy  after  the  Jews  have  returned  from  exile 
and  are  dwelling  in  quiet  and  security,  a  vast  horde  of  peoples 
from  the  north  and  south  (Persia,  Cush,  Put,  Gomer,  Togarmah), 
under  Gog  of  the  land  of  Magog,  will  be  moved  to  gather 
themselves  together  against  Jehovah's  people;  and  Jehovah 
will  then  call  for  a  sword  against  them,  and  every  man's 
sword  shall  be  against  his  brother.  And  there  shall  be 
rained  upon  Gog  and  his  hordes  hailstones  and  fire  and 
brimstone ;  and  thereby  shall  Jehovah  be  magnified  and  sancti- 
fied. And  after  the  overthrow,  the  people  of  Israel  shall  burn 
the  weapons  and  bury  the  slain;  and  they  shall  make  fires 
of  the  former  seven  years;  and  seven  months  shall  they  be 
burying  the  dead,  that  they  may  cleanse  the  land  {Ezek.  xxxviii,, 
xxxix.).  It  will  be  seen  that  this  predicted  judgment  has  no 
relation  to  the  conditions  of  the  prophet's  own  time;  the  date 
is  remote  and  indefinite ;  and  the  nations  concerned  lie  beyond 
the  usual  horizon  of  Israel.  The  spirit  which  animates  it  is  also 
remarkable  for  exhibiting,  by  the  side  of  the  more  generous  views 
just  described,  a  return  of  the  fierce  and  exclusive  temper  of  an 
earlier  time,  due,  it  may  be  presumed,  to  the  painful  and  igno- 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  451 

minious  experiences  which  the  nation  had  undergone  acting 
upon  the  stern  disposition  of  a  particular  prophet.  Predictions 
of  this  kind  which  (i.)  have  as  their  subject  the  contrasted 
destinies  of  Israel  and  of  the  heathen  world  in  general,  and 
betray  towards  the  latter  a  bitter  and  vindictive  spirit,  (ii.)  profess 
to  disclose  a  comprehensive  and  final  judgment  of  God  in  the 
far-off  future,  (iii.)  represent  the  impious,  whether  Jews  or  heathen, 
as  destroyed  in  a  stupendous  catastrophe,  accomplished  by 
supernatural  agency,  have  received  the  name  of  Apocalyptic 
prophecies.  Appearing  for  the  first  time  in  this  age  (unless 
Mic.  iv.  11-13  is  an  earlier  example)  they  become  much  more 
numerous  at  subsequent  periods. 

{c)  Certain  of  the  prophets  of  the  Babylonian  age,  like  their 
predecessors,  associated  the  era  of  happiness,  which  they  believed 
to  be  awaiting  their  nation,  with  the  reign  of  a  native  ruler — a 
descendant  of  the  line  of  David.  By  the  mouth  of  Jeremiah, 
Jehovah,  when  denouncing  the  shepherds  who  scattered  the 
flock,  declares  that  when  He  restores  Israel,  He  will  set  up 
shepherds  who  will  feed  the  flock;  and  in  further  explanation 
promises  that  He  will  raise  unto  David  a  righteous  Scion  (Uter- 
ally  shoot  or  sprcutY  who  shall  execute  judgment,  and  save  the 
people ;  and  whose  name  shall  be  Jehovah  is  our  righteousness 
(in  allusion  possibly  to  the  name  of  Zedekiah,  the  last  king  of 
Judah,  whose  conduct  belied  the  appellation  he  bore)  {Jer. 
xxiii.  1-8,  cf  xxxiii.  14-18).  By  the  same  prophet  Jehovah 
announces  that  in  the  day  that  He  breaks  the  yoke  of  His 
people,  strangers  shall  no  more  serve  themselves  of  them,  but 
they  shall  serve  Jehovah  their  God  and  David  their  king,  whom 
He  will  raise  up  unto  them  {Jer.  xxx.  9).  So  too  Ezekiel,  when 
prophesying  against  the  shepherds  of  Israel,  declares  that 
Jehovah  will  save  His  flock  by  setting  over  them  one  shep- 
herd who  shall  feed  them,  even  His  servant  David  {Ezek. 
xxxiv.  23-24).  Ezekiel,  again,  when  speaking  of  the  re-union 
of  the  two  houses  of  Jacob,  contemplates  the  time  when  one 
king  shall  be  king  over  them  all,  and  proceeds  to  add  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah,  "  My  servant  David  shall  be  king  over  them  " 

*  The  same  word  occurs  in  Is.  iv.  2,  but  there,  as  the  parallelism  shows, 
the  word  denotes  the  produce  of  the  soil. 


452  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

(xxxvii.  24).  In  these  passages  it  is  a  line  of  sovereigns,  repre- 
sented by,  and  personified  in,  its  founder,  and  not  a  single  pre- 
eminent individual  that  is  in  the  prophets'  thoughts.  This  is 
made  apparent  in  Jer.  xxxiii.  15,  where,  after  the  repetition  of 
xxiii.  5  (included  in  the  passage  summarised  above),  it  is  added, 
"  David  shall  never  want  a  man  to  sit  upon  the  throne  of  the 
house  of  Israel"  (cf.  also  iii.  15,  xvii.  24-25,  xxii.  4).  The  only 
passage  suggestive  of  a  single  Personality,  to  be  bom  at  some 
future  time,  is  Ezck.  xxi.  27,  where  the  prophet,  apostrophising 
the  reigning  "prince  of  Israel,"  the  weak  and  insincere  Zede- 
kiah,  bids  him,  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  take  off  the  crown, 
and  declares  that  "this  (/>.  the  crown)  shall  be  no  more  until 
he  come  whose  right  it  is;  and  I  will  give  it  him."  The 
language  resembles  the  rendering  presented  by  some  versions 
of  Geri.  xlix.  10,  "until  he  come  whose  it  is."  But  if  the  refer- 
ence is  to  an  Individual,  it  is  not  further  elucidated ;  though  it 
may  be  presumed  that  the  prophet's  conception  of  the  king  who 
should  have  (in  a  moral  and  ideal  sense)  a  better  right  to  the 
crown  than  the  last  of  Judah's  sovereigns  was,  in  general,  similar 
to  that  of  his  predecessor  Isaiah,  which  has  already  been  explained. 

4.  The  Age  of  the  Exile. 

The  Exile  could  scarcely  fail  to  produce  upon  the  Jewish  com- 
munity a  great  alteration  both  in  the  outward  conditions  of 
their  worship,  and  in  their  internal  disposition  and  character. 
The  loss  of  nationality  would  naturally  lead  the  more  patriotic 
amongst  them  to  cherish  the  more  highly  their  distinctive  religious 
faith ;  and  the  circumstances  under  which  they  were  constrained 
to  maintain  it,  since  they  did  not  extinguish  it,  helped  to  purify 
it  Severance  from  the  Holy  Land,  and  from  Jerusalem,  the 
sole  legitimate  sanctuary,  brought  with  it  a  suspension  of  the 
system  of  sacrifice,  so  that,  failing  a  wholesale  adoption  of  heathen 
practices,  the  religion  of  Jehovah  was  not  exposed  to  the  subtle 
dangers  of  contamination.  The  public  ceremonial  which  had 
hitherto  constituted  so  much  of  the  religious  life  of  the  people 
was  replaced  by  private  devotions,  in  which  confession  of  sin  was 
prominent  (cf.  2  Is.  Ixiv.  6) ;  and  general  fasts  were  observed  on 
the  anniversaries  of  the  various  calamities  that  had  attended  the 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  453 

siege  of  Jerusalem  (see  Zech.  vii.  2  foil.).  As  a  special  mark  to 
distinguish  Jehovah's  people  from  those  amongst  whom  their  lot 
was  cast  (cf.  Ezek,  xx.  20),  stress  was  laid  by  the  religious  leaders 
of  the  nation  upon  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  {2  Is.  Iviii.  13, 
Ivi.  2,  4,  6)  (perhaps  post-exilic).  Moreover,  the  interruption  of 
the  nation's  independent  life  tended  to  transfer  interest  from  the 
present  to  the  past  and  the  future,  and  the  narrower  sphere 
within  which  their  activities  were  confined  gave  leisure  for  reflec- 
tion, for  which  their  new  circumstances  afforded  such  ample 
material  The  fall  of  Jerusalem  and  the  captivity  of  its  inhabi- 
tants had  strikingly  vindicated  the  warnings  of  the  prophets,  and 
could  not  fail  to  invest  them  with  increased  authority  when  they 
continued  to  assert  a  connection  between  the  fortunes  of  their 
race  and  its  religious  and  moral  condition,  or  declared  that  its 
prosperity  was  dependent  upon  its  faithfulness  to  Jehovah.  And 
when  eventually  the  signs  of  Babylon's  approaching  overthrow 
became  evident,  the  splendour  of  its  religious  worship  only  threw 
into  greater  relief  the  ignorance  and  impotence  of  its  divinities  as 
contrasted  with  the  power  and  foreknowledge  of  Israel's  God. 
Jehovah's  supreme  and  solitary  godhead  became  now  the  subject 
not  merely  of  dogmatic  affirmation,  but  of  reasoned  argument; 
and  the  prophets  were  enabled  to  expose  the  futility,  whilst 
denouncing  the  disloyalty,  of  idol-worship.  In  consequence, 
there  was  brought  about  during  the  comparatively  brief  interval 
of  the  Exile,  a  conspicuous  change  in  the  religious  tendencies  of 
the  Jewish  people,  who,  whatever  the  errors  into  which  they  subse- 
quently fell,  never  again  manifested  the  same  pronounced  inclina- 
tion towards  alien  forms  of  worship  which  had  distinguished  their 
forefathers. 

Of  the  prophetic  writers  of  this  era  one,  namely  Ezekiel,  has 
previously  come,  in  part,  under  consideration  in  connection  with 
the  preceding  age;  and  it  has  already  been  remarked  that  in  certain 
respects  a  considerable  difference  of  spirit  exists  between  him  and 
Jeremiah.  An  equally  wide  divergence  in  another  direction  is 
observable  between  those  sections  of  his  book  which  now  call  for 
notice  and  the  writings  of  his  younger  contemporary  who  has 
been  styled  the  Second  Isaiah,  and  who,  in  many  ways,  is  the 
most  eminent  of  the  prophets  of  the  Exile.     Though  certain 


454  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

ideas  are  common  to  both  (especially  such  as  are  developments 
of  thoughts  current  in  the  previous  age)  they  are  expressed  very 
differently  by  each ;  and  the  actual  additions  made  at  this  time 
to  Hebrew  religious  beliefs  are  individual  and  not  common 
contributions.  In  examining  the  teaching  of  the  prophets  re- 
ferred to  and  others,  it  will  be  convenient  to  view  it  as  it  bears 
upon  the  two  subjects  previously  indicated — the  character  and 
attributes  of  Jehovah,  and  His  relations  to  Israel  and  the  peoples 
outside  it. 

I.  (a)  It  was  pointed  out  in  an  earlier  chapter  that  even  in  the 
ages  when  the  existence  of  other  gods  than  Jehovah  was  generally 
accepted,  the  superiority  of  Israel's  God  over  the  gods  of  the 
surrounding  peoples  was  affirmed  in  the  national  songs  (see  Ex. 
XV.  II,  and  cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  2,  Ps.  xviii.  31),  whilst  His  power  with- 
out as  well  as  within  the  limits  of  His  own  land  and  nation  was 
attested  by  many  stories  of  wonder.  By  the  time  of  the 
Assyrian  supremacy,  the  religious  faith  of  the  prophets  of  the 
period  had  become,  to  all  intents  and  purposes,  monotheistic. 
But  by  the  prophets  of  the  Exile,  and  especially  by  the  Second 
Isaiah,  monotheism  was  expounded  and  enforced  with  unpre- 
cedented explicitness  and  directness.  Jehovah  (it  was  declared) 
is  the  Creator  of  the  world  and  the  supreme  Ruler  of  the  ele- 
ments ("y^r."  X.  12  foil.,  2  Is.  xl.  26,  xlii.  5).  He  has  made  the 
earth  and  created  man  upon  it  (2  Is.  xlv.  12,  18);  He  is  the 
Author  of  all  things  {2  Is.  xliv.  24),  the  Incomparable,  the 
Unsearchable  (2  Is.  xl.  18,  25,  28,  xlvi.  5).  He  is  the  High 
and  Lofty  One  that  inhabiteth  eternity  (Ivii.  15) ;  the  God  of  the 
whole  earth  is  He  to  be  called  (liv.  5).  He  knows  the  future, 
and  alone  can  predict  unerringly  things  to  come  (xlii.  9, 
xlviii.  3,  5);  He  declares  the  end  from  the  beginning  (xlvi.  10); 
He  speaks  things  that  are  right  (i.e.  correct)  (xlv.  19,  cf.  xli.  26). 
He  directs  the  fortunes  of  men,  raising  up  Cyrus  to  fulfil  His 
purposes,  and  crowning  him  with  success  (xli.  2,  xlv.  i).  He 
is  the  only  Saviour  (xliii.  11),  to  whom  all  the  ends  of  the  earth 
are  bidden  to  look  (xlv.  22).  Finally,  He  is  the  only  God; 
beside  Him  there  is  none  other  (xliv.  6,  8,  xlv.  5-6).  And 
consequent  upon  this  profounder  sense  of  Jehovah's  sole  god- 
head, iheie  is  displayed  a  vehement  scorn  for  idols  and  their 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  455 

worshippers.  Idols  are  nothing ;  they  are  invited  in  vain  to  do 
good  or  to  do  evil ;  if  one  cries  to  them,  yet  they  cannot  answer 
him,  nor  save  him  out  of  his  trouble  (xli.  24,  xlvi.  7).  They 
that  fashion  a  graven  image  are  all  of  them  vanity;  they  have 
no  knowledge,  who  pray  unto  a  god  that  cannot  save  (xliv.  9, 
xlv.  20).  Mockery  and  derision  are  heaped  upon  the  folly  of 
those  who  from  the  same  timber  fashion  a  god  for  worship 
and  procure  fuel  for  preparing  their  food  (xliv.  10-20,  cf.  "/<rr." 
X.  8-9).  And  further  to  expose  the  senselessness  of  idolatry, 
Jehovah  is  represented  as  throwing  down  a  challenge  to  the  idol- 
gods  of  Babylon,  and  defying  them  to  show  any  power  of  pre- 
diction equal  to  that  which  He  has  already  displayed  (2  Is. 
xli.  22,  xliii.  9,  xlv.  21,  xlvii.  13). 

(3)  But  if  this  fuller  apprehension  of  Jehovah's  unique  greatness 
deepened  the  contempt  with  which  the  prophets  viewed  the  idol- 
worshippers  around  them,  it  was  not  without  its  effect  upon  their 
estimate  of  their  own  countrymen.  Israel  appeared  too  unworthy 
for  regard  for  it  to  be  the  mainspring  of  the  Divine  dealings  with 
it ;  the  controlling  motive  of  Jehovah's  actions  (as  Ezekiel  had 
already  implied,  see  xx.  14,  44  and  p.  442)  could  be  no  external 
consideration,  but  had  to  be  sought  solely  in  His  purpose  of 
self-revelation.  God's  tenderness  towards  Israel  obtains  frequent 
expression  (see  2  Is.  xl.  11),  but  it  was  in  the  Divine  glory  rather 
than  in  the  Divine  graciousness  that  the  explanation  was  found 
of  His  treatment  of  His  people.  It  was  impossible  that  Jehovah's 
intentions  should  be  rendered  of  none  effect  by  Israel's  dis- 
obedience and  sin  ;  so  that  whilst  His  justice  had  required  their 
temporary  punishment.  His  faithfulness  demanded  that  they 
should  be  saved  from  annihilation.  God  had  created  Israel 
for  His  praise  {2  Is.  xliii.  7,  21),  and  His  honour  was  concerned 
in  their  vindication  (xlviii.  11).  Pity  for  His  holy  name,  which 
Israel's  exile  had  brought  into  contempt  (Hi.  5,  cf.  Ezek. 
xxxvi.  20,  23),  leads  Him  to  restore  them :  He  refrains  His 
anger,  blots  out  their  trangressions,  and  recalls  them  to 
favour,  not  for  their  sakes  but  His  own  (2  Is.  xliii.  25,  xlviii. 
9,  11;  cf.  £zek.  xxxvi.  21,  32).  As  a  consequence  of  this 
way  of  contemplating  the  Divine  motives,  the  balance  of  thought 
was  shifted  from  what  Jehovah  required /r<?;w  His  people  to  what 


456  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

He  proposed  to  do  for  them.  Hence  righteousness^  which  in  the 
pre-exilic  Isaiah  signifies  the  civil  justice  and  uprightness  which 
God  demands  of  His  people  (v.  7),  is,  in  the  Second  Isaiah, 
generally  synonymous  with  salvation^  i.e.  the  deliverance  which 
Jehovah  is  pledged  to  bestow  upon  His  people  in  virtue  of  His 
fidelity  to  His  promises  {2  Is.  xlv.  8,  xlvi.  13,  li.  5,  6,  Ivi.  i, 
hx.  17). 

{c)  A  kindred  feeling  of  the  vast  distance  between  the  sanctity 
of  Jehovah  and  the  imperfection  of  even  a  redeemed  people  is 
exhibited  by  Ezekiel;  but  in  him  it  takes  a  peculiar  form.  He 
was  a  priest  (i.  3),  to  whom  the  religious  institutions  of  the 
nation  were  of  importance  no  less  than  the  conversion  of  indi- 
viduals (see  pp.  443-4) ;  and  in  a  vision  which  he  had  of  Israel's 
re-establishment  in  its  own  land,  the  restoration  of  the  Temple 
has  a  prominent  place.  But  his  conception  of  Jehovah's 
sanctuary  is  an  ideal  one;  and  the  situation  and  arrangements 
of  the  new  structure  are  specially  intended  to  contrast  Jehovah's 
holiness  with  the  nation's  impurity,  and  to  guard  the  former 
against  profanation.  The  territory  of  Israel,  which  is  assumed 
to  extend  from  the  border  of  Hamath  to  Tamar  (?  Engedi)  and 
Kadesh,  and  from  the  Jordan  to  the  Mediterranean  (the  district 
E.  of  the  Jordan  being  excluded),  is  divided  into  a  number  of  parallel 
sections  stretching  in  succession  from  the  river  to  the  sea,  which 
are  assigned  to  the  several  tribes.  In  the  middle  is  the  domain 
of  the  priests,  which  includes  the  sanctuary ;  and  separating  this 
from  the  tribal  divisions,  there  is  on  one  side  the  domain  of  the 
Levites,  and  on  the  other  that  of  the  citizens  of  Jerusalem; 
whilst  E.  and  W.  of  it  is  the  portion  of  the  prince  and  his 
successors.  Into  the  Temple,  which  is  the  abode  of  Jehovah 
and  is  filled  with  His  glory,  no  alien  or  uncircumcised  is  allowed 
to  pass;  the  bulk  of  the  Levites  are  restricted  to  the  lower 
offices  of  service  in  it,  as  having  defiled  themselves  with  idolatry 
at  the  local  "  high  places " ;  and  only  the  sons  of  Zadok, 
attendants  at  the  purer  worship  at  the  Temple  before  its  de- 
struction, are  to  act  as  priests  {Ezek.  xl.-xlviii.).  In  this 
description  of  Ezekiel's,  there  re-appears  something  of  the 
physical  notion  of  purity  which  prevailed  in  earlier  times. 
Jehovah's  holy  name  is  represented  as  having  been  desecrated  in 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  45; 

the  past  not  only  by  the  nation's  whoredoms  {i.e.  the  worship 
of  other  gods),  but  by  the  nearness  to  His  earthly  dwelling-place 
(the  Temple)  of  the  dead  bodies  of  its  kings;  and  both  sources 
of  pollution  must  be  avoided  for  the  future  (xliii.  7-9).  Profana- 
tion had  been  caused  not  alone  by  murder  and  oppression,  but 
by  the  priests'  failure  to  put  any  difference  between  the  holy  and 
the  common  -,  and  in  the  restored  community  it  is  especially 
directed  that  the  people  are  to  be  taught  to  discern  between  the 
clean  and  the  unclean  (xxii.  26,  xliv.  23).  This  insistence  upon 
ceremonial  holiness  (see  further  xliii.  18-27,  xliv.  17-27,  etc.), 
though  not  really  incompatible  with  the  protests  of  Amos 
(v.  21-24),  Jeremiah  (vi.  20,  vii.  21-26),  and  the  Second  Isaiah 
(Iviii.  2-1 1 )  against  formalism,  nevertheless  contrasts  rather 
strikingly  with  them,  and  betrays  in  him  a  different  spirit  from 
that  which  animated  the  prophets  who  immediately  preceded 
and  followed  him.  Yet  even  in  Jer.  and  2  Is.  there  is  a 
significant  stress  laid  upon  the  duty  of  hallowing  the  Sabbath 
(Jer.  xvii.  21,  22,  27,  2  Is.  Ivi.  4,  6,  Iviii.  13)^  as  well  as  in 
Ezekiel  (xliv.  24),  where  it  is  represented  as  being  the  Divinely 
appointed  symbol  of  the  bond  between  Jehovah  and  His  people 
(xx.  12,  20).  The  conditions  of  the  Exile  naturally  brought  this 
aspect  of  the  Sabbath  into  prominence,  turning  it  from  a  day  of 
repose  for  man  into  a  day  to  be  kept  holy  unto  Jehovah. 

2.  {a)  As  has  been  seen,  the  ultimate  restoration  of  Israel  was 
predicted  even  by  the  prophets  who  laboured  before  its  ruin,  and 
whose  minds  were  mainly  occupied  with  the  thought  of  the 
intervening  calamity.  But  during  the  Exile,  the  contemplation 
of  Israel's  future  was  no  longer  darkened  by  the  shadow  of 
a  chastening  judgment.  The  judgment  had  fallen,  and  the 
expectation  of  an  impending  disaster  for  Jerusalem  was  conse- 
quently replaced  by  the  anticipation  of  an  approaching  dis- 
comfiture for  its  oppressor  Babylon  and  for  the  nations  that  had 
rejoiced  in  Judah's  overthrow.  The  indignation  at  Israel's  trans- 
gressions which  had  filled  the  older  prophets,  was,  in  their 
successors,  converted  into  sympathy  with  its  sufferings  and  joy 

*  Jer.  xvii.  19-27  by  some  scholars  is  considered  to  be  a  late  interpolation 
of  the  time  of  Nehemiah  (cf.  Neh.  xiii.  15-19);  whilst  the  last  eleven  chapters 
of  2  Is.  are  likewise  regarded  by  many  as  post-exilic  (see  Introd.  p.  22), 


4  5?  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

at  the  prospect  of  its  restoration.  The  city  to  which  Jehovah, 
in  His  anger,  had  committed  the  task  of  chastising  His  people 
had  shown  itself  merciless  and  arrogant  in  its  treatment  of  them 
{2  Is.  xlvii.  6),  and  Israel  had  received  double  for  its  sins  (xl.  2). 
Its  calamities  now  called  for  redress,  whilst  vengeance  awaited  its 
persecutor.  The  doom  coming  upon  Babylon  is  painted  with 
all  the  lavishness  of  an  imagination  stimulated  by  the  memo- 
ries of  the  most  poignant  of  national  injuries.  Those  who  are 
within  her  are  bidden  to  flee  out  of  her,  lest  they  be  cut  ofif  in 
her  iniquity  {**/er."  li.  6,  45 ;  cf.  1.  8).  Her  assailants  are 
Jehovah's  "mighty  men,"  whom  He  Himself  musters  for  battle 
("Is."  xiii.  3-4).  The  agents  who  are  to  give  effect  to  the 
Divine  retribution  are  clearly  indicated.  The  Medes  are  the 
appointed  instruments  of  Babylon's  downfall  ("Is."  xiii.  1 7,  *'/er,** 
li.  II,  28);  and  the  restorer  of  the  Jews  to  their  own  land  is 
Cyrus,  Jehovah's  "Anointed"  (2  Is.  xli.  25  foil.,  xlv.  1-4).  The 
site  of  the  tyrant  city  is  to  become  a  wilderness,  and  its  desola- 
tion is  to  be  for  ever  ("/j."xiii.  20-22).  The  same  fate  is  to 
overtake  all  who,  like  the  Edomites,  had  triumphed  in  Judah*s 
affliction  ("Is."  xxxiv.  5  foil.,  2  Is.  Ixiii.  1-6) ;  and  their  over- 
throw is  to  be  accompanied  by  convulsions  and  portents  in 
earth  and  heaven  ("Is."  xiii.  10,  xxxiv.  4).  Contrasted  with  this 
is  the  deliverance  of  Jehovah's  people.  The  face  of  nature  will 
be  transformed  to  further  the  return  of  the  exiles,  and  to  con- 
tribute to  their  happiness  ("Is."  xxxv.  i  foil,  2  Is.  xli.  18,  xliii. 
19,  li.  3).  Into  the  Holy  City  there  shall  henceforth  no  more 
come  the  uncircumcised  and  unclean  (lii.  i);  but  her  people 
shall  be  all  righteous,  and  shall  inherit  the  land  for  ever  (Ix,  21, 
cf.  Ezek.  xxxvii.  25). 

(d)  The  attitude  of  the  prophets  of  this  age  towards  foreign 
peoples  fluctuates  and  varies.  In  certain  highly-wrought  passages 
which  describe  the  redemption  of  Israel,  it  is  represented  that 
Jehovah  has  indignation  against  all  the  nations,  and  that  His 
day  of  vengeance  is  near  at  hand  ("Is."  xxxiv.  2,  2  Is.  Ixi.  2, 
Ixiii.  4).  He  will  contend  with  those  that  contend  with  Israel; 
and  by  the  destruction  of  the  oppressors  He  will  make  Himself 
known  to  all  flesh  as  the  Saviour  and  Mighty  One  of  Jacob 
(2  Is.  xlix.  26).     Meanwhile,  Jehovah's  people  are  to   possess 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  459 

the  nations  {2  Is.  liv.  3),  who  are  to  become  the  servants  and 
thralls  of  Israel  (xiv.  2,  xlv.  14,  xlix.  23) ;  they  are  to  bring  to  the 
redeemed  community  their  choicest  products  (Ix.  5  foil.),  and  the 
kingdom  that  will  not  serve  them  shall  perish  {id.  12).  In 
general,  however,  the  relations  of  Jehovah  to  the  nations  at  large 
are  regarded  by  the  writers  of  this  time  in  a  different  light.  The 
idea  that  Israel  is  invested  with  a  mission  to  the  Gentiles,  and 
that  its  original  election  by  God  had  this  purpose  in  view,  is 
now  extensively  developed  {2  Is.  xlii.  i,  4-6).  The  conversion 
of  the  world  to  a  knowledge  of  Jehovah  is  represented  as  the 
result  not  only  of  fear  but  of  attraction.  Israel,  after  her  re- 
storation, which  will  exhibit  so  signally  Jehovah's  character  and 
power,  will  become  a  centre  to  which  the  peoples  will  resort. 
Those  that  know  her  not  will  run  unto  her  because  of  Jehovah 
who  has  glorified  her  (Iv.  5).  Nations  shall  come  to  her  light, 
and  kings  to  the  brightness  of  her  rising  (Ix.  3) ;  and  they  shall 
see  her  righteousness  and  her  glory  (Ixii.  2).  Strangers  shall 
cleave  to  the  house  of  Jacob  (xiv.  i):  one  shall  say,  "I  am 
Jehovah's,"  and  another  shall  call  himself  by  the  name  of  Jacob, 
and  another  shall  write  on  his  hand,  "Jehovah's,"  and  surname 
himself  by  the  name  of  Israel  (xliv.  5).  Jehovah  shall  judge  the 
peoples,  the  isles  shall  wait  for  Him,  and  on  His  arm  shall  they 
trust  (li.  5).  There  shall  arrive  a  time  when  to  Jehovah  every 
knee  shall  bow,  every  tongue  shall  swear ;  when  His  house  shall 
be  called  the  house  of  prayer  for  all  peoples;  when  He  shall 
gather  to  Israel  others  beside  its  own  outcasts,  and  will  bring 
them  to  His  holy  mountain  and  make  them  joyful  in  His  house 
of  prayer,  and  their  burnt  offerings  and  their  sacrifices  shall 
be  accepted;  and  when  even  eunuchs  will  have  a  place  within 
Jehovah's  house  and  walls  and  be  given  a  memorial  better 
than  sons  and  daughters  (xlv.  23,  Ivi.  3-8 ;  contrast  Deut. 
xxiii.  i).^  The  language  of  many  of  these  passages  is  rhetorical, 
and  not  to  be  understood  literally:  but  it  affords  sufficient 
evidence  of  the  extreme  breadth  of  view  and  the  compre- 
hensive and  catholic  spirit  which  characterised  the  chief  prophets 
of  the  Exile ;  and  Ezekiel,  whose  attitude  to  the  heathen  world 

^  References  to  2  Is.  Ixvi.  have  purposely  been  excluded,  since  that  chapter 
is  probably  post-exilic ;  see  p.  22. 


46o  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

is  least  generous,  in  his  scheme  for  the  regulation  of  the  restored 
exiles,  gives  a  place  in  it  to  the  strangers  sojourning  among  them, 
who  should  be  unto  them  as  the  home-born  among  the  children 
of  Israel  (Ezek.  xlvii.  22-23). 

This  idea  that  Israel's  destiny  embraced  the  good  of  the  world 
at  large,  now  that  it  was  fully  realised,  was  seen  to  throw  light  upon 
a  problem  that  had  perplexed  previous  prophets.  Habakkuk, 
in  consequence  of  Babylon's  destruction  of  Israel,  a  nation 
which  was  righteous  by  comparison  with  its  oppressor,  had  been 
led  to  complain  of  God's  government  of  the  world  (see  Hab.  i.  13). 
But  the  moral  difficulty  thus  presented  found  a  solution  when  it 
was  once  perceived  that  the  trials  of  the  righteous  nation  filled  a 
place  in  a  Divine  scheme  of  purposes  that  included  all  mankind. 
The  afflictions  of  Israel  appeared  to  be  agencies  for  conveying  to 
those  who  witnessed  or  even  inflicted  them  instruction  and  en- 
lightenment respecting  Jehovah,  whilst  the  patient  endurance  of 
ill  on  the  part  of  God's  people  could  not  go  without  recompense. 
And  a  similar  problem  to  that  which  troubled  Habakkuk  in  regard 
to  the  fate  of  the  collective  Hebrew  nation  at  the  hands  of  its 
foes  had  exercised  Jeremiah  in  regard  to  the  unworthy  treatment 
of  righteous  individuals  within  it  by  their  godless  fellow-country- 
men ^Jer,  xii.  i),  and  admitted  the  same  solution.  The  un- 
merited tribulations  of  the  upright  did  not  imply  injustice  or 
unconcern  in  God,  but  were,  if  freely  submitted  to,  conducive  to 
the  redemption  even  of  the  wicked  who  occasioned  them.  In 
virtue  of  the  fellowship  which  an  innocent  man,  by  his  willing 
sufferings  with  and  for  the  guilty,  established  between  himself  and 
them,  his  afflictions  availed  to  make  intercession  for  them.  The 
older  sense  of  solidarity  based  on  blood-relationship  which  had 
rendered  the  guiltless  involuntary  partakers  in  the  punishment  of 
the  guilty  had  in  the  previous  age  given  place  to  the  assertion  of 
individual  rights  and  a  demand  that  everyone  should  suffer  for  his 
own  offences  only.  This  was  now  qualified  by  a  sense  of  solid- 
arity resting  on  sympathy,  and  leading  to  voluntary  self-sacrifice, 
which,  in  the  long-run,  was  bound  to  promote,  under  a  righteous 
God,  the  welfare  both  of  him  who  made  the  sacrifice  and  (under 
certain  conditions)  of  those  for  whom  it  was  made.  This  solution 
of  the  problems  which  confronted  the  prophets  of  an  earlier 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  461 

generation  was  worked  out  by  the  Second  Isaiah  in  a  series  of 
passages  which  describe  the  mission  and  career  of  Jehovah^s 
Servant^  a  figure  which  sometimes  represents  the  collective  nation, 
and  sometimes  (xlii.  1-7,  xlix.  1-9,  1.  4-9,  Hi.  13-liii.  12)  an  indi- 
vidual or  group  of  individuals  within  it. 

The  application  of  the  term  JehovaKs  Servant  to  the  people 
of  Israel  generally  is  perfectly  clear  in  places  like  2  Is,  xli.  8,  xlii. 
19-25,  xliv.  I,  21,  xlv.  4,  xlviii.  20  {oi,  Jer.  xxx.  10,  xlvi.  27,  Ezek. 
xxxvii.  25).  But  in  xlii.  1-7  the  Servant  is  described  as  designed 
by  Jehovah  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  for  a  light  of  the  Gentiles, 
to  open  the  blind  eyes  and  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the 
dungeon,  whereas  in  xlii.  19  he  is  himself  described  as  blind  and 
unobservant ;  so  that  the  expression  is  manifestly  used  in  a  double 
sense.  This  double  sense  is  still  more  apparent  in  xHx.  1-9 
where  the  Servant^  soliloquising,  represents  himself  as  being 
addressed  by  Jehovah  under  the  title  of  Israel  (ver.  3),  whilst  he  is 
also  distinguished  from  Israel^  inasmuch  as  he  is  intended  to  raise 
up  the  tribes  of  Jacob  as  well  as  to  be  a  light  to  the  Gentiles 
(ver.  6).  In  the  discharge  of  this  duty  there  is  given  to  him  the 
tongue  of  them  that  are  taught,  that  he  should  know  how  to 
sustain  with  words  him  that  is  weary  (1.  4,  cf.  Ixi.  1-3).  In  the 
course  of  his  labours  he  is  despised  and  abhorred  by  the  nation 
(xlix.  7);  he  submits  to  blows  and  ill-treatment  (1.  5-6);  his 
visage  is  marred  more  than  any  man's  (Hi.  14) ;  and  as  one  from 
whom  men  hide  their  face,  he  is  held  in  no  esteem  (liii.  3). 
Finally,  the  persecution  he  endures  is  ended  by  an  unjust  death 
to  which  he  goes  uncomplainingly,  and  he  is  buried  with  the 
wicked  and  with  such  as  had  acquired  ill-gotten  gain  (Hii.  7-9). 
Yet  it  is  the  iniquities  of  others  that  he  bears,  and  for  the  sins  of 
others  his  life  is  sacrificed  (Hii.  5-6).  And  consequently,  as 
during  his  lifetime  he  left  his  recompense  with  Jehovah  and  his 
judgment  with  his  God  (xlix.  4),  so  his  reward  follows  him  after 
his  death.  When  his  soul  shaH  make  a  guilt-offering  for  sin,  he 
shall  see  his  seed  and  prolong  his  days  (presumably  in  the  sense 
of  having  a  long  line  of  descendants  or  disciples) ;  he  shall  see 
of  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied,  and  shall  be  reckoned 
amongst  great  and  triumphant  conquerors  (Hii.  10-12). 

That  the  Servant,  even  when  not  meant  to  denote  Israel  as  a 


462  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

whole,  is  still  a  collective  expression,  designating  a  class  of  persons 
rather  than  a  single  individual,  is  suggested  by  the  occurrence  of 
references  to  a  certain  number  of  the  exiles  whose  character 
and  experiences  resemble  those  of  the  Servant  (cf.  li.  7  with 
xlix.  7  and  liii.  3).  Particular  features  in  the  description  of  the 
Servant  further  point  to  the  faithful  prophets  of  Jehovah  as  being 
more  especially  in  the  writer's  mind:  for  instance,  in  xHv.  26 
Jehovah! s  servant  is  parallel  with  His  messengers ^  whilst  "the 
tongue  of  them  that  are  taught"  or  "of  disciples"  (1.  4  and 
marg.),  which  the  Servant  receives,  recalls  "the  disciples  of  the 
prophets"  {Is.  \\n.  16),  who  doubtless  themselves  became  pro- 
phets in  course  of  time.  And  alike  in  the  afflictions  of  the 
Servant  and  the  reflections  which  support  him  under  them  there 
are  some  striking  resemblances  to  those  related  of  the  prophet 
Jeremiah  (cf.  liii.  7  with  Jer.  xi.  19,  liii.  3,  8  yfiihjer.  xx.  lo-ii). 
And  on  the  supposition  that  the  corporate  body  of  the  prophets 
are  primarily  indicated,  the  double  sense  in  which  the  figure  of 
the  Servant  is  employed  becomes  fairly  intelligible.  The  prophets 
may  justly  be  regarded  as  performing  the  functions  and  enacting 
the  role  which  the  nation  collectively  (as  was  now  perceived)  was 
intended  to  discharge  amongst  mankind.  As  their  people's  repre- 
sentatives they  may  be  considered  to  have  toiled  and  suffered 
vicariously  for  their  countrymen,  who  persecuted  and  rejected 
them,  but  who  nevertheless  owed  to  them  the  grace  which  they 
received  from  the  hands  of  God.  They  may  even  be  viewed  as 
the  authors  of  their  country's  redemption  and  restoration  (xlix.  6, 8) 
inasmuch  as  the  destiny  of  Israel  was  dependent  upon  its  realising 
its  vocation,  of  which  the  prophets  were  the  chief  exponents  and 
illustrators.^ 

But  though  the  Servant  would  seem  to  be  a  personification  of 
the  prophetic  order  generally,  united  in  a  single  figure,  the 
description  in  point  of  fact  goes  beyond  anything  which,  up  till 
then,  had  appeared  in  history.  Among  the  prophets  whose 
labours  and  sufferings  are  most  nearly  reproduced  in  the 
passages  considered  above  is  (as  has  been  said)  Jeremiah.  Yet 
noble  and  self-sacrificing  and  steadfast  as  Jeremiah  was,  there 
sometimes  broke  from  him  (in  spite  of  what  he  says  of  himself 
*  Cf.  Skinner,  Is,  xl,-lxvi.  p.  xxxiv. 


RELIGION  FROM  SOLOMON  TO  THE  EXILE  463 

in  xi.  19)  imprecations  against  his  persecutors  (see  Jer.  xvii.  18, 
xviii.  19-23,  XX.  11-12),  which  contrast  glaringly  with  what  is 
recorded  of  the  Servant  in  2  Is.  liii.  7.  And  a  review  of 
human  history  in  general  and  of  Hebrew  history  in  particular 
leads  to  the  conclusion  that  the  character  of  the  Servant  long 
remained  an  ideal  one.  More  than  500  years  passed  before  it 
was  realised,  and  the  creation  of  the  prophet's  inspired  genius 
obtained  concrete  embodiment  in  the  life  and  death  of  Jesus  of 
Nazareth. 

{c)  It  has  been  seen  that  Ezekiel  in  the  earlier  portion  of  his 
prophetic  ministry  contemplated,  like  his  contemporary  Jeremiah, 
the  restoration  of  the  two  branches  of  the  house  of  Jacob  under 
a  descendant  of  the  family  of  David  (p.  448).  But  in  the 
scheme  drawn  up  at  a  later  date  for  the  reconstitution  of  the 
Jewish  nation  as  soon  as  their  predicted  return  to  their  own  land 
should  be  an  accomplished  fact,  the  representative  of  Judah's 
royal  line  occupies  a  less  conspicuous  position.  It  is  assumed, 
indeed,  that  the  people  will  be  organised  under  a  prince,  who  is, 
no  doubt,  to  be  identified  with  the  descendant  of  David  men- 
tioned previously;  but  the  prince  is  no  longer  regarded  as  the 
active  dispenser  of  the  blessings  promised  by  Jehovah  (as  is  the 
case  in  xxxiv.  23-24).  On  the  contrary,  care  is  taken  to  guard 
against  possible  exactions  on  the  part  of  him  and  his  successors 
by  assigning  for  their  maintenance  a  certain  domain  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  sanctuary,  that  they  may  no  more  oppress 
Jehovah's  people  (xlv.  7-9,  xlvi.  18).  The  principal  function 
of  the  prince  is  to  provide  the  materials  for  the  Temple  sacrifices; 
the  cost  of  which  is  to  be  met  by  oblations  given  to  him  by  the 
nation.  The  comparatively  humble  role  here  specifically  assigned 
to  the  sovereign  is  partly  to  be  explained  by  the  fact  that  the 
prophet's  arrangements  concern  the  religious  rather  than  the 
secular  life  of  the  community.  But  it  is  also  in  part  due  to  the 
physical  and  local  conceptions  entertained  of  the  Divine  presence 
by  Ezekiel,  who  represents  the  Almighty  as  entering  with  His 
chariot  into  the  Temple,  and  making  it  the  place  of  His  Throne 
(xliii.  1-7).  The  immediate  and  direct  rule  of  Jehovah  in  the 
midst  of  His  people  inevitably  dwarfs  all  human  authority  beside 
Him,  and  renders  the  figure  of  the  king  insignificant  and  sub- 


464  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

ordinate.  In  2  Is.  the  Messianic  king  has  no  place.  The  title 
"Anointed  "  (Heb.  Messiah),  indeed,  is  applied  to  Cyrus  (xlv.  i), 
who  is  regarded  as  raised  up  by  Jehovah  to  accomplish  the 
Divine  purposes.  But  this  can  scarcely  be  considered  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  earlier  line  of  thought ;  and  elsewhere  Jehovah 
is  represented  as  intervening  in  His  own  Person  for  the  purpose 
of  saving  or  avenging  His  people.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
passage  ^^  Zeck^  ix.  9-12  has  been  incorporated,  as  the  language 
suggests,  from  an  exilic  prophecy  by  a  later  writer,  the  concep- 
tion of  the  Messianic  king  had  not  wholly  disappeared  in  this 
period.  It  differed,  however,  materially  from  that  which  pre- 
vailed during  the  Assyrian  age,  for  whereas  the  rule  of  the  king 
described  by  Isaiah,  though  productive  of  peace,  rested  upon  the 
active  exercise  of  authority  by  him  in  the  interests  of  justice 
{Is.  ix.  7,  cf.  xi.  1-9),  the  peace,  whereof  the  entry  into  Zion  of 
her  king  riding  upon  an  ass  was  a  symbol,  was  the  creation  of 
Jehovah;  whilst  the  king  himself  was  lowly  and  the  recipient 
of  justice  and  salvation,  not  the  bestower  of  them  {"Zech.'^  ix.  9). 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE 

Sources — Ezra^  Nehemiah^  Esther^  Daniel^  Haggai^  Zechariah 
i.-viii.,  "Zech."  ix.-xiv.,  Malachi^  Joel^  Jonah. 

IT  was  only  two  years  after  the  fall  of  Babylon  that  the  Jewish 
people,  whose  liberty  she  had  destroyed,  found  in  her  con- 
queror their  long-desired  vindicator.  Cyrus,  as  he  advanced  upon 
Babylon,  had  been  hailed  with  prophetic  prescience  by  the  Second 
Isaiah  2t.s  Jehovah' s  anointed  (2  Is.  xlv.  i) ;  and  in  536  he  fulfilled 
the  hopes  entertained  of  him  by  giving,  partly,  indeed,  in  accord- 
ance with  a  general  policy  pursued  towards  several  subject  states,  ^ 
but  partly,  perhaps,  in  response  to  personal  appeals,  such  as  were 
made  to  one  of  his  successors  (see  Ez.  vii.  6,  JVeh.  ii.  4),  permis- 
sion to  all  Jews  to  return  to  Jerusalem  and  there  restore  the 
Temple  of  Jehovah.  Those  who  took  advantage  of  the  offer  are 
represented  as  amounting  to  42,360,  together  with  men-servants 
and  maid-servants  (to  the  number  of  7,337)  and  200 ^  professional 
singers;  but  as  the  total  is  largely  in  excess  of  the  items  that 
constitute  it,^  there  must  either  be  an  error  in  the  text,  or  else 
the  figure  is  that  to  which  the  population  had  increased  by  a  later 
date.*    The  bulk  of  the  people  doubtless  belonged  to  the  tribes 

1  See  Sayce,  If.  C.  M.,  p.  507. 

•  So  in  Ez.  ii.  65  ;  in  Neh.  vii.  67  the  number  is  245. 

•  Some  of  the  constituent  figures  are  given  differently  in  Neh.  vii.  8  foil. 

•  The  total  sum  stated  is  doubtless  greater  than  the  reality  (contrast  the 
1,754  nun  brought  J)y  Ezra  at  a  later  date,  see  p.  474),  and  some  scholars  have 
believed  that  the  exiles  who  came  back  from  Babylon  in  536  were  "  few  and 
unimportant"  (see  Kent,  History  of  the  Jewish  People^  p.  130),  whilst  others 
have  maintained  that  there  was  no  return  at  all  until  after  520  and  that  the 
Temple  built  in  520  was  the  work  of  the  population  that  still  remained  in 
Judaea  after  the  capture  of  Jerusalem  {2  Kg.  xxv.  12).     This  latter  conclusion 

I   H  465 


466  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

of  Judah,  Benjamin,  and  Levi;  but  it  is  not  improbable  that 
some  members  of  the  other  tribes  were  included.^  The  Priests 
were  4,289,  the  Levites  74,  the  Singers^  and  Porters  267,  and 
certain  inferior  Temple-ministers  styled  Nethinim  and  "  the  chil- 
dren of  Solomon's  servants"^  392.  The  head  of  the  returning 
community  is  variously  called  Sheshbazzar*  and  Zerubbabel.  It 
seems  probable  that  the  two  names  denote  the  same  individual  ;5 
but  it  is  possible  that  Sheshbazzar  is  to  be  identified  with  She- 
nazzar,  one  of  the  sons  of  king  Jehoiachin  (7  Ch.  iii.  18)  and 
uncle  of  Zerubbabel.  If  so,  he  must  have  been  succeeded  almost 
immediately  by  his  nephew,  who  was  the  son  of  another  of 
Jehoiachin's  children,  Shealtiel  or  Pedaiah.^  The  leader  in  any 
case  was  a  descendant  of  the  royal  family  of  Judah.  He  was 
invested  with  the  authority  of  governor  (his  Persian  title  being 
Tirshatka^  Ez.  ii,  63),  and  he  had  associated  with  him  the  priest 

is  based  on  (i)  the  terms  remnant  and  people  of  the  land  applied  by  Haggai 
and  Zechariah  to  those  whom  they  addressed  in  520  (see  Hag.  i.  12,  14,  ii.  4, 
Zech.  viii.  6,  ii,  vii.  5),  (2)  the  fact  that  Zechariah  seems  to  refer  to  a  return 
of  exiles  in  the  future  (ii.  6-7,  viii.  7,  8).  But  that  the  people  to  whom  the 
prophets  just  named  appealed  were  Jews  lately  restored  from  Babylon  is 
probable  from  the  absence  of  any  charges  of  idolatry  against  them ;  and  the 
fact  of  such  a  restoration  in  536  is  not  only  positively  asserted  in  Ez.  i.,  iii., 
but  is  implied  in  the  decree  alluded  to  in  Ez.  v.  13-17,  for  the  erection  of  the 
Temple  therein  commanded  by  Cyrus  is  not  likely  to  have  been  projected 
except  for  a  body  of  Babylonian  Jews  in  whom  the  Persian  king  had  become 
interested  (see  G.  A.  Smith,  The  XII.  Prophets,  ii.  p.  204  foil. ).  And  if  a 
return  was  really  effected  with  the  encouragement  of  Cyrus,  it  can  scarcely 
have  been  as  insignificant  in  numbers  and  character  as  is  sometimes  repre- 
sented, though  it  was  undoubtedly  not  exhaustive  (see  Zech.  vi.  9  and  Ez.  vii., 
viii. ),  and  was  followed  by  others,  which  the  passages  in  Zech.  ii.  6-7,  viiL  7, 8, 
cited  above,  have  in  view. 

^  In  7  Ch.  ix.  3  Ephraim  and  Manasseh  are  mentioned  in  addition  to  Judah 
and  Benjamin. 

2  These  were  attached  to  the  Temple-service,  and  were  distinct  from  the 
200  ordinary  minstrels  mentioned  above. 

^  The  name  perhaps  alludes  to  what  is  related  in  /  Kg.  ix,  20-21, 

*  LXX.  B,  Za^ayaadp. 

'  In  favour  of  their  identity  is  the  fact  that  the  foundation  of  the  Temple  is 
ascribed  to  both  {Ez.  v.  16,  iii.  8);  and  the  double  name  may  be  paralleled  by 
the  instances  of  Daniel,  Hananiah,  Mishael,  and  Azariah,  who  were  re- 
spectively called  Belteshazzar,  Shadrach,  Meshach,  and  Abednego.  On  the 
other  hand,  some  scholars  regard  Sheshbazzar  not  only  as  distinct  from 
Zerubbabel,  but  as  a  Persian  commissioner  (cf.  Ez.  v.  14  (LXX. ),  /  Esd.  vi.  18X 

^  He  is  called  the  son  of  Shealtiel  in  Ez.  iii.  8  etc.,  but  the  son  of 
Pedaiah  in  /  Ch.  iii,  19,  being  presumably  the  natural  son  of  the  one  and  the 
legal  son  (by  a  Levirate  marriage)  of  the  other. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       467 

Jeshua  or  Joshua,  whose  grandfather,  the  high  priest  Seraiah, 
had  been  put  to  death  by  Nebuchadrezzar  at  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem  {2  Kg.  xxv.  18  foil),  and  whose  father  Jehozadak  had 
been  carried  into  captivity  (/  Ch.  vi.  15).  To  furnish  the  Temple 
that  was  to  be  re-built  Cyrus  gave  to  him  the  vessels^  which  had 
been  taken  from  the  first  Temple ;  and  whilst  exhorting  all  who 
could  to  forward  the  return  of  the  exiles  by  their  contributions 
charged  himself  with  the  expenses  {Ez.  vi.  4).  The  king's  man- 
dates were  carried  out,  the  journey  across  the  Syrian  desert 
(perhaps  by  Carchemish,  Hamath,  and  the  valley  of  the  Orontes) 
was  safely  accomplished,  and  after  a  captivity  of  fifty  years  the 
Jews  were  once  more  estabHshed  in  their  native  land. 

In  Ezra  i.  2  Cyrus  is  made  to  use  the  language  of  a  worshipper  of  Jehovah, 
asserting  that  Jehovah  had  given  him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth,  and  had 
charged  him  with  the  duty  of  building  Him  a  house  in  Jerusalem.  But  Cyrus 
in  his  own  inscriptions^  expressly  ascribes  his  success  to  Merodach  the  god  of 
Babylon,  and  styles  himself  his  worshipper ;  and  though  he  may  have  done 
this  for  political  reasons,  he  can  scarcely  have  been  a  monotheist. 

The  seventy  years  which  the  Exile  is  repeatedly  represented  as  having  lasted 
is  a  round  number,  and  is  given  in  connection  with  different  periods.  Thus 
Jeremiah  (xxix.  10)  uses  it  when  writing  to  those  who  were  carried  into 
captivity  with  Jehoiachin  in  596,  between  which  date  and  the  Return  in  536 
sixty  years  elapsed.  It  is  employed  by  Zechariah  (i.  12)  in  520  to  describe 
the  period  that  had  passed  between  the  beginning  of  the  captivity  in  596  or 
586  and  his  own  day,  which  consequently  covered  either  seventy-six  or  sixty- 
six  years.  And  it  is  again  used  by  Zechariah  (vii.  5)  in  518  to  denote  a  period 
of  either  seventy-eight  or  sixty-eight  years.  On  the  other  hand  Ezekiel  (iv.  6) 
reckons  the  Exile  at  the  conventional  figure  of  forty  years  (cf.  p.  416,  note). 

Those  who  returned  with  Zerubbabel  and  Jeshua  did  not 
include  by  any  means  all  the  exiles  or  even  the  wealthiest  and 
most  prosperous ;  but  they  were  numerous  enough  to  occupy,  if 
not  at  once,  at  any  rate  eventually,  a  number  of  towns  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Jerusalem,  such  as  Gibeon,^  Bethlehem,  Neto- 
phah,  Anathoth,  Kiriath  Jearim,  Chephirah,  Beeroth,  Ramah,  Geba, 
Michmash,  Bethel,  Ai,  Nebo  (or  Nob),  and  Jericho.  Some  kind 
of  scrutiny  seems  to  have  been  made  into  the  Hebrew  descent  of 
those  who  desired  to  share  fully  in  the  restored  community ;  and 
those  of  the  priests  who  failed  to  establish  their  Israelite  origin 
were   forbidden   to   perform   any  sacerdotal   function   until   the 

*  The  total  (5,400)  in  i.  11  is  largely  in  excess  of  the  sum  of  the  items 
(2,499)  enumerated  in  ver.  9,  10.         '^  See  Sayce,  H.  C.  M.,  p.  505. 

^  In  Ez.  c.  ii.  the  list  of  towns  probably  begins  with  ver.  20  (where  Gideon 
should  be  read  for  Gibbar)  and  ends  with  ver.  35  ;  d  N(h.  vii.  25-38. 


468  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

authoritative  pronouncement  of  a  priest  with  Urim  and  Thummim 
could  supply  the  defect  of  documentary  evidence.  When  the 
people  were  once  more  settled  on  their  native  soil,  a  united 
gathering  was  held  at  Jerusalem  in  the  seventh  month  of  the 
year,  the  altar  of  Jehovah  was  built,  the  Feast  of  Tabernacles  kept, 
and  the  observance  of  the  daily  sacrifice  and  of  the  system  of 
festivals  established.  The  Temple,  however,  was  not  yet  begun ; 
and  it  was  to  the  task  of  its  re-construction  that  the  energies  of 
the  people  were  next  devoted.  Towards  the  building  and  its 
equipment  offerings  of  gold  and  silver  and  priestly  garments  were 
contributed  by  Zerubbabel  the  Tirshatha,  and  some  others  of  the 
principal  men.  As  in  the  time  of  Solomon,  recourse  was  had  to 
Zidon  and  Tyre  for  materials  and  workmen,  payment  being  made 
in  kind;  and  the  cedar-wood  required  was  brought  by  sea  to 
Joppa.  To  three  Levitical  families  was  entrusted  the  oversight 
of  the  work ;  and  in  the  second  month  of  the  second  year  after 
the  Return  the  foundation  of  the  Temple  was  laid  to  the  accom- 
paniment of  music  and  singing.  It  was  justly  an  occasion  for 
enthusiastic  rejoicing ;  but  to  the  old  men  who  could  remember 
the  first  Temple  the  contrast  between  Solomon's  stately  fane  and 
the  structure  in  process  of  erection  before  them  could  not  fail  to 
bring  tears  ^  {Ez.  c.  iii.). 

The  work  was  not  destined  to  advance  without  interruption. 
The  news  of  what  was  being  done  at  Jerusalem  soon  reached  the 
ears  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  Persian  province  of  Samaria.  These 
were  in  part  the  descendants  of  the  immigrants  introduced  after 
the  fall  of  the  city  of  Samaria  by  the  Assyrian  kings  Sargon 
{2  Kg.  xvii.  24),  Esar-haddon  {Ez.  iv.  2),  and  Asshurbanipal 
{Ez.  iv.  10)  to  replace  the  Israelites  who  were  deported.  But 
they  included  many  of  Hebrew  stock ;  and  the  influence  of  the 
latter,  aided  by  the  reforms  of  Josiah  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  15-20),  had 
been  sufficiently  great  to  maintain  among  them  the  worship  of 
Jehovah,  though  doubtless  in  a  corrupt  form  (cf.  2  Kg.  xvii.  33, 
41).  2    They  now  approached  the  settlers  at  Jerusalem  with  the 

^  Yet  if  the  incomplete  dimensions  given  in  Ez.  vi.  3  are  any  clue,  the 
size  of  the  Second  Temple  exceeded  that  of  the  First. 

^  In  Ez,  iv.  2  there  are  two  readings,  one  aflfirming  and  the  other  denying, 
the  practice  of  sacrifice  to  Jehovah  amongst  the  Samaritans,  but  the  weight  of 
the  evidence  seems  decidedly  in  favour  of  the  first ;  cf.  Ryle  ad  loc. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       469 

request  to  be  allowed  to  take  part  in  the  re-building  of  the 
Temple.  But  the  Judseans  refused  the  advances  of  those  whom 
they  regarded  not  as  Hebrews  but  as  Cuthaeans  (cf.  Ecdus,  1.  25, 
and  see  2  Kg.  xvii.  24) ;  and  laying  stress  upon  the  decree  granted 
to  themselves  alone,  declined  to  permit  the  applicants,  as  a  com- 
munity, to  have  any  share  in  the  work,  though  eventually  those 
Israelites  who  separated  themselves  from  their  heathen  associates 
were  admitted  to  participation  {Ez.  vi.  21).  In  consequence  of 
this,  a  bitter  feud  arose ;  and  the  people  of  Samaria  now  did  all 
they  could,  by  active  interference  or  by  misrepresentation  to  the 
authorities,  to  hinder  the  further  operations  of  the  builders.  In 
this  they  were  successful;  and  the  erection  of  the  Temple  was 
left  uncompleted  through  the  remainder  of  the  reign  of  Cyrus, 
and  the  reigns  of  his  successors  Cambyses  (529-522)  and  the 
Pseudo-Smerdis  (522-521),  until  the  accession  of  Darius  I,  the 
son  of  Hystaspes,  in  521  {Ez.  iv.  5,  24).^ 

If  Ez.  iv.  6-23  is  connected  with  the  context  immediately  preceding,  and 
refers  to  the  representations  made  to  the  Persian  authorities  by  the  adversaries 
of  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Zerubbabel,  the  names  of  the  Persian  kings 
Ahashverosh  and  Artahshashta  (ver.  6,  7,  marg.)  must  stand  for  Cambyses  and 
the  Pseudo-Smerdis,  the  predecessors  of  Darius  Hystaspis.  But  not  only  is 
the  difference  in  the  names  too  great  to  render  this  probable,  but  Ahashverosh 
regularly  represents  Xerxes  in  Esth.  i,  i,  etc.,  and  Artahshashta  is  clearly 
ArtaxerxeSy  one  of  the  successors  of  Darius,  in  Ez.  vi.  14 ;  whilst  as  a 
matter  of  fact  the  passage  in  question  (iv.  6-23)  relates  to  the  construction  of 
the  walls  of  Jerusalem  (see  ver.  12,  16),  not  to  the  re-building  of  the  Temple. 
It  is  therefore  misplaced  in  its  present  position  and  will  come  under  notice 
later  on. 

After  the  re-construction  of  the  Temple  had  once  been  inter- 
rupted by  the  machinations  of  the  Samaritans,  the  Jews  them- 
selves began  to  lose  their  interest  in  it,  and  were  more  concerned 
with  building  houses  for  themselves  than  with  restoring  the 
House  of  Jehovah.  They  were  roused  from  their  supineness  by 
the  preaching  of  two  prophets,  Haggai  and  Zecliariali,^  whose 
rebukes  of  both  their  religious  and  moral  failings  seemed  to 
them   to    be   enforced   by   the   simultaneous    occurrence  of   a 

*  At  the  beginning  of  Darius'  reign  (521),  and  again  in  514,  Babylon 
revolted,  and  its  overthrow  is  by  some  thought  to  be  the  occasion  referred  to 
in  "/r."  xxiv.-xxvii. 

"^  Zechariah,  who  in  Ez.  v.  i  is  called  the  son  of  Iddo,  was  really  son  of 
Berechiah  and  grandson  of  Iddo  (see  Zech.  i.  i).  He  may  be  the  Zechariah 
mentioned  in  Neh.  xii.  16  as  accompanying  Zerubbabel. 


470  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

disastrous  season  (Hag,  i.  9-1 1).  In  consequence  of  their  ex- 
hortations, helped  by  the  arrival  of  envoys  with  presents  from 
the  Jewish  community  in  Babylon  {Zech,  vi.  9  foil.),  the  task  of 
re-building  the  Temple  was  resumed^  after  an  interval  of  fifteen 
or  sixteen  years,  in  the  second  year  of  Darius  Hystaspis  (b.c.  520). 
The  resumption  of  operations  at  first  excited  suspicion;  and 
enquiries  were  made  of  the  elders  of  the  Jews  by  the  Persian 
Tattenai  (governor  of  all  the  country  W.  of  the  Euphrates,^  and 
Zerubbabel's  official  superior)  and  by  his  colleague  Shethar- 
bozenai,  as  to  their  right  to  prosecute  the  work.  The  elders 
referred  to  the  decree  of  Cyrus,  and  a  letter  reporting  their 
answer  was  sent  to  Darius,  with  a  request  that  search  might  be 
made  for  the  decree  alluded  to,  the  work  meanwhile  being 
allowed  to  continue.  The  decree  was  found  at  Achmetha 
(Ecbatana) ;  and  the  king  thereupon  confirmed  it,^  and  directed 
that  aid  both  in  money  and  kind  should  be  given  to  the  Jews, 
alike  for  the  building  of  the  Temple  fabric  and  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  daily  sacrifices,  requiring  at  the  same  time  that 
prayer  should  be  offered  for  himself  and  his  house.  Thus  en- 
couraged the  Jews  made  rapid  progress,  and  in  Adar,  the  twelfth 
month  of  the  sixth  year  of  Darius,  b.c.  516,  the  Temple  was 
completed  and  dedicated.  The  thoughts  of  all  present  could 
not  fail  to  be  carried  back  to  the  dedication  of  the  earlier  Temple 
nearly  500  years  before ;  and  as  that  was  the  creation  of  a  united 
Israel,  so  by  an  effort  of  the  imagination  the  twelve  tribes  were 
regarded  as  having  part  in  the  present  structure,  and  twelve  he- 
goats  were  sacrificed  as  a  sin-offering  {Ez.  vi.  17).  The  dedica- 
tion festival  was  followed  on  the  first  month  of  the  next  year  by 
a  celebration  of  the  Passover,  at  which  those  Israelites  who  had 
not  shared  the  Exile  but  had  become  mingled  with  the  popula- 
tion of  the  land  were  allowed  to  be  present  on  separating  them- 
selves from  their  corrupt  surroundings. 

*  In  Ez.  V.  2  the  words  began  to  build  used  of  Zerubbabel  at  the  date  must 
not  be  pressed  ;  cf.  ver.  16  (end). 

2  In  Ez.  V.  3  the  expression  governor  beyond  the  river  is  probably  a  Persian 
official  title,  and  refers  to  the  W.  and  not  the  E.  of  the  Euphrates. 

^  In  Ez.  vi.  14  the  mention  of  Artaxerxes,  one  of  the  successors  of  Darius, 
is  out  of  place  in  connection  with  a  decree  for  building  the  Temple.  It 
doubtless  anticipates  what  is  related  subsequently  in  c.  vii. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       471 

By  some  scholars  it  has  been  thought  that  the  foundations  of  the  Temple 
were  first  laid  not  in  535  but  in  520,  since  Haggai  seems  to  imply  that  when 
he  prophesied  the  building  was  not  yet  begun  (see  Hag.  i.  2,  4,  ii.  15).  But  it 
seems  most  reasonable  to  treat  his  expressions  as  rhetorical,  and  to  conclude 
that  the  Temple  was  really  commenced  in  535  (as  stated  in  Ez.  iii.  8-10, 
V.  16),  though  progress  was  soon  suspended  (cf.  p.  465,  note). 

No  description  is  furnished  in  the  book  of  Ezra  of  Zerub- 
babel's  Temple.  Even  its  dimensions  are  imperfectly  given,  the 
height  and  breadth  alone  being  stated  (each  extending  to  sixty 
cubits)  whilst  the  length  is  not  indicated  {Ez.  vi.  3).  If  the 
later  temple  of  Herod  (described  by  Josephus)  be  any  guide,  it 
may  be  inferred ^  that  it  consisted  of  three  courts:  (i)  an  outer 
court  called  the  Court  of  the  GeniiUsy  to  which  alone  foreigners 
were  admitted ;  (2)  a  second  within  the  former  and  raised  above 
it  called  the  Court  of  the  Women^  which  alone  females  might 
enter;  (3)  a  third  within  and  above  the  second,  known  as  the 
Inner  or  Upper  Court,  This  last  was  divided  into  two  parts,  to 
only  one  of  which  laymen  had  access,  the  other  being  confined 
to  the  Priests.  Within  the  Court  of  the  Priests  the  Temple  itself 
stood,  consisting  of  a  Holy  Place  and  a  Holy  of  Holies^  the  latter 
now  destitute  of  the  Ark.  The  fabric  of  it,  together  with  the 
furniture  belonging  to  it,  was  probably  designed  on  the  plan  of 
the  earlier  building  and  its  contents,  but  was  necessarily  of 
less  costly  materials  and  less  artistic  workmanship.  Its  con- 
struction was  an  event  of  immense  importance  in  the  history 
of  the  Jewish  race.  In  it  the  Hebrew  religion  once  more 
obtained  a  local  sanctuary  which  by  its  services  afforded  in- 
dulgence, and  by  its  associations  added  strength,  to  the  emotions 
of  natural  piety.  It  served,  too,  as  a  centre  for  popular  in- 
struction, and  for  the  preservation  of  the  religious  traditions  of 
the  nation.  But  under  the  circumstances  of  the  time,  the 
restoration  of  the  Temple  could  scarcely  fail  to  give  renewed 
vitality  to  that  tendency  in  the  people  towards  religious  formalism 
of  which  so  many  of  the  prophets  had  in  the  past  complained  j 
whilst  it  offered  favourable  ground  for  the  growth  of  an  ex- 
clusive spirit  which  eventually  developed  into  intolerance. 

From  this  point  for  more  than  fifty  years  the  history  of  the 
Jewish  community  in  Palestine  is  almost  a  blank,  nothing  beingr 

*  See  Hunter,  After  the  Exile^  i.  p.  202  foil 


472  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

known  even  of  the  end  of  Zerubbabel.  Darius  Hystaspis  died 
in  485  and  was  succeeded  by  Xerxes.  During  his  reign  it  is 
probable  that  an  attempt  was  made  to  surround  Jerusalem  with 
walls;  for  this,  after  the  completion  of  the  Temple,  seems  to 
be  the  proceeding  most  calculated  to  afford  ground  for  a  com- 
plaint against  the  Jews  on  the  part  of  their  enemies  the 
Samaritans.  An  accusation  of  some  kind,  at  any  rate,  was 
made  against  them  to  Xerxes  at  the  beginning  of  his  rule; 
but  all  particulars  about  it  are  wanting  {Ez.  iv.  6).^  To  this 
period  the  prophetic  activity  of  Malachi  should  probably  be 
assigned; 2  and  if  so,  some  light  is  thrown  upon  the  moral  and 
rehgious  condition  of  the  Jewish  community.  The  hopes  raised 
by  the  optimist  predictions  of  2  Isaiah  had  been  disappointed. 
The  people  were  in  the  enjoyment  of  neither  the  social  superiority 
nor  the  material  abundance  which  had  been  promised  them ;  for 
their  neighbours  had  been  able  to  inflict  mortifications  upon 
them,  and  the  products  of  their  soil  suffered  from  blight 
{Mai.  ii.  2).  These  calamities  had  an  unhappy  effect  upon  the 
temper  and  conduct  of  the  nation.  Perjury,  adultery,  and 
oppression  began  to  prevail  (iii.  5),  unions  were  formed  with 
the  heathen  or  half-heathen  population  around  them  (Jewish 
wives  in  some  cases  being  divorced  with  a  view  to  marriage 
with  foreign  women,  ii.  10-16) ;  the  Temple  service  was  neglected 
and  dishonoured  (i.  6-14);  and  the  priesthood  was  robbed  of  its 
dues  (iii.  7-10).  Even  those  who  kept  themselves  pure  from 
such  guilt  grew  despondent  and  complaining  (ii.  17,  iii.  14). 
It  was  to  rebuke  these   sins   and  to  still  these  murmurs  that 

*  On  this  passage  see  p.  469. 

^  The  precise  date  of  Malachi  may  fall  (a)  before  Ezra's  visit  to  Jerusalem 
in  458,  [b)  after  458  but  before  Nehemiah's  first  visit  in  445,  (c)  between 
Nehemiah's  departure  in  433  and  his  second  visit,  {d)  after  this  last  visit. 
But  {c)  and  {d)  are  improbable  in  view  of  Malachi's  description  of  the  priests 
as  the  sons  of  Levi  (iii  3,  cf.  ii.  4)  (after  the  manner  of  Deuterofiomy)^  whereas 
in  the  law  promulgated  in  444  {Neh.  x.)  the  priests  the  sons  of  Aaron  were 
distinguished  from  the  rest  of  the  Levites ;  whilst  the  prophet's  language  in 
certain  passages  resembles  that  of  Deuteronomy  rather  than  that  of  the  Priestly 
code,  e.g.  iii.  5  (cf.  Deut.  xxiv.  17),  iii.  17  (cf.  Deut.  vii.  6,  xiv.  2,  xxvi.  18), 
iv.  4  (cf  Deut.  iv.  5).  On  the  other  hand,  the  injunction  requiring  the  tithes 
to  be  brought  into  the  Temple  (iii.  10)  is  not  that  of  Deuteronomy  (see  xiv. 
22-29),  but  of  Num.  xviii.  21-24  (P)  J  so  though  the  Law-book  with  which 
Malachi  was  acquainted  was  most  likely  Deut.,  certain  usages  were  in  force 
which  were  afterwards  codified  in  the  legislative  enactments  of  P. 


THE  RETURN  FROM  tH£  EXILE      473 

Malachi  laboured,  asserting  that  the  scarcity  that  pinched  them 

was  due  to  the  profanation  of  Jehovah's  sanctuary,  and  predicting 

a  day  of  judgment  in  which  both  the  righteous  and  the  wicked 

would  receive  their  deserts  (iii.  1 7-iv.  3). 

It  was  in  Xerxes'  reign  that  the  incidents  recorded  in  the  book 

of  EstJier  in  connection  with  certain  Jews  dwelling  in  Shushan 

(Susa)  occurred,  so  far  as  they  have  any  basis  in  fact.     According 

to  the  narrative,  Xerxes  had  taken  into  his  harem,  and  made 

his  queen,  a  beautiful  Jewess  named  Esther,  the  cousin  of  a 

certain  Mordecai,  a  descendant  of  those  Jews  who  had  been 

taken  captive  with  Jehoiachin.     A  minister  of  the  king's,  called 

Haman,  to  revenge  himself  upon  Mordecai,  who  did  not  show 

him  due  reverence,  procured  from  the  king,  by  the  prospect 

of  spoil  to  be  obtained,  a  decree  for  a  general  massacre  and 

pillage  of  the  Jews  on  a  certain  day,  as  being  a  people  of  alien 

laws  and  unruly  character.     But  before  the  decree  was  carried 

out,  a   record  of  service  done   to   the  king  by  Mordecai  was 

brought  to  the  notice  of  Xerxes,  who  directed  Haman  to  see 

that   his  benefactor  was  rewarded  with  the   distinctions  which 

Haman  himself  had  suggested  should  be  bestowed  on  the  man 

whom  the  kring  delighted  to  honour;  whilst  Esther  denounced 

Haman   as    the   author   of  the   edict  against   her  countrymen. 

Haman,  in  spite  of  his  appeals  to  the  queen,  was  hanged  on  the 

gallows  he  had  made  for  Mordecai ;  and  by  another  decree  the 

Jews  were   permitted   to  stand  on  their  defence  against   their 

enemies.      Their  deliverance  from  the  danger  that  threatened 

them  was  thenceforward  celebrated  by  an  annual  feast  called 

Purim^  which  was  observed  for  two  days. 

There  is  a  manifest  straining  after  effect  in  the  narrative  of  the  book 
of  Esther ;  no  confirmation  of  the  incidents  recorded  is  forthcoming  from 
other  sources  ;  and  the  description  of  Esther  as  Xerxes'  queen  is  inconsistent 
with  Herodotus'  uniform  practice  of  styling  Amestris  Xerxes'  wife  (vii.  6i,  114, 
ix.  109).  But  the  feast  of  Purim  was  a  widely  observed  festival,  and  in 
2  Mac.  XV.  36  reference  is  made  to  an  anniversary  called  the  day  of  Mordecai ; 
so  that  it  seems  most  reasonable  to  assume  that  the  book  is  an  embellished 
and  exaggerated  account  of  an  actual  occurrence. 

Xerxes  died  in  464  and  was  succeeded  by  Artaxerxes  I. 
(Longimanus).  He  seems  to  have  been  favourably  disposed 
towards  the  Jews,  and  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign  (458  B.C.) 
another  body  of  exiles  left  Babylonia  for  Jerusalem.     This  was 


474  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

organised  and  directed  by  Ezra,  a  learned  priest  and  scribe^  and 
a  descendant,  like  Zenibbabel's  colleague  Jeshua,  of  Seraiah.^ 
His  special  object  in  proceeding  to  Palestine  was  to  diffuse 
among  his  countrymen  a  better  knowledge  of  the  Law  of  Moses, 
to  the  study  of  which  he  was  himself  devoted,  and  the  obser- 
vance of  which  was  at  this  time  probably  stricter  at  Babylon 
than  at  Jerusalem.  To  aid  him  in  his  purpose  he  obtained  from 
Artaxerxes  a  letter  allowing  him  to  take  into  Judaea  as  many 
Jews  as  of  their  own  free  will  desired  to  accompany  him,  and 
empowering  him  to  appoint  magistrates  and  judges  to  enforce 
under  penalties  the  maintenance  of  the  Law.  He  was  further 
instructed  to  convey  to  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem  on  the  king'5 
behalf  vessels  for  its  service,  and  such  offerings  as  the  Law 
enjoined,  and  commissioned  to  draw  additional  supplies  from 
the  royal  treasuries  in  the  provinces  W.  of  the  Euphrates ;  whilst, 
as  a  further  favour,  all  priests  and  Levites,  and  even  the  inferior 
ministers  of  the  Temple,  were  exempted  from  taxation.  A  body 
of  men^  to  the  number  of  1,496,  including  members  of  many 
of  the  families  represented  in  the  expedition  of  Zerubbabel, 
assembled  to  accompany  him.  But  amongst  them  no  Levites 
were  included  (their  backwardness  in  joining  both  Zerubbabel 
and  Ezra  being  probably  due  to  their  recent  exclusion  from  the 
priesthood  as  directed  by  Ezekiel)*;  and  he  had  to  procure  some 
by  appealing  to  a  certain  Iddo,  under  whom  a  number  of 
JSethinim  were  settled  at  a  place  called  Casiphia.  Of  these  220 
attached  themselves  to  Ezra ;  and  his  company  having  increased 
to  1,754,  together  with  women  and  children,  he  assembled  his 
followers  at  the  river  of  Ahava,  ^  where  he  proclaimed  a  fast  and 
entreated  Divine  assistance.  He  then  started  on  his  journey, 
which  from  the  lack  of  an  escort  (which  he  felt  ashamed  to  ask 

^  The  term  in  the  O.T.  is  used  of  three  distinct,  though  allied,  classes  01 
functionaries:  (i)  the  royal  Secretaries  at  the  courts  of  the  Hebrew  kings 
(2  Sam.  viii.  17,  etc.),  or  the  state  officials  attending  foreign  governors 
\Ez.  iv.  8),  (2)  the  amanuenses  employed  by  some  of  the  prophets  {Jer» 
xxxvi.  32),  (3)  copyists  and  students  of  the  Law  (,Ez.  vii.  6). 

^  But  probably  through  a  younger  branch.  Ezra's  genealogy  in  Ez,  vii. 
1-5  is  an  abbreviated  one. 

3  The  figures  of  Ezra's  expedition  diflfer  from  those  given  in  connection 
with  Zerubbabel's  in  representing  males  only.  ^  See  p.  456. 

'  Conjectured  to  be  the  name  of  an  artificial  canal  near  Babylon. 


THE  RETURN   FROM  THE  EXILE       475 

for)  was  not  without  danger  (Ez,  viii.  22,  31),  and  occupied  four 
months;  and  eventually  arrived  safely  at  his  destination.  The 
gifts  ^  entrusted  to  him  he  placed  in  the  hands  of  a  certain 
Meremoth,  son  of  Uriah  the  priest,  with  whom  three  others  were 
associated;  and  after  offering  sacrifice  for  all  Israel,  he  pro- 
ceeded to  deliver  to  the  satraps  and  governors  the  king's  com- 
missions. 

Ezra,  as  has  been  said,  left  Babylon  for  Jerusalem  with  the 
purpose  of  instructing  the  Palestinian  Jews  in  the  Law  of  Moses, 
as  he  understood  it.  The  feature  in  the  social  life  of  the  people 
which  seemed  to  him  to  be  in  most  urgent  need  of  reform  was 
the  practice  of  intermarriage  with  foreign  women,  in  which  many 
of  the  "princes"  had  taken  the  lead  {JEz.  ix.  2).  Such  alliances 
were,  no  doubt,  calculated  to  diminish  the  hostility  with  which 
the  restored  community  was  generally  regarded  by  their  im- 
mediate neighbours;  and  plausible  reasons  might  be  urged  for 
their  toleration.  But  the  evil  results  which  they  had  often  pro- 
duced upon  the  national  religion  had  been  made  visible  in  the 
history  of  the  Monarchy;  and  it  was  Ezra's  desire  to  safeguard 
his  countrymen  from  incurring  again  the  Divine  judgments  which 
had  punished  them  so  severely.  In  Deuteronomy^  however,  the 
Law-book  with  which  the  people  were  familiar,  it  was  only 
marriage  alliances  with  the  Canaanites  that  were  altogether  for- 
bidden (vii.  1-3) ;  in  the  case  of  Moabites  and  Ammonites 
exclusion  from  the  assembly  of  Jehovah  was  enforced  until  the 
tenth  generation  ;2  but  in  the  case  of  Egyptians,  children  of  the 
third  generation  might  enter  the  assembly  (xxiii.  3-8).^  The 
comprehensive  prohibition,  therefore,  of  intermarriage  with  any 
foreigners,  which  Ezra  sought  to  enforce  was,  in  strictness,  an 
extension  of  the  Deuteronomic  law,  the  principle  laid  down  in 
certain  instances  being  applied  to  cover  others  originally  regarded 

^  The  value  of  the  gifts,  as  implied  in  Ez.  viii.  26,  has  been  estimated  at 
nearly  a  million  sterling,  and  exaggeration  has  reasonably  been  suspected. 

^  Interpreted  in  Neh.  xiii.  i  to  mean  "for  ever." 

'  Historic  instances  of  unions  between  Israelites  and  women  of  the 
surrounding  nations  to  which  no  exception  is  taken  by  the  O.T.  writers  are 
those  of  Boaz  with  Ruth  the  Moabitess,  of  David  with  the  daughter  of  the 
king  of  Geshur  {2  Sam.  iii.  3),  and  of  Solomon  with  the  daughter  of  the  king 
of  Egypt  (/  Kg.  iii.  i). 


476  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

as  distinct.  In  a  formal  ^  complaint  made  to  him  by  some  of  the 
princes  that  their  fellow-countrymen  had  not  separated  them- 
selves from  the  peoples  of  the  lands,  but  had  contracted 
marriages  with  them,  Ammonites,  Moabites  and  Egyptians  were 
placed  in  the  same  category  with  Canaanites,  Hittites,  Perizzites, 
Jebusites  and  Amorites.  Ezra,  on  publicly  learning  the  fact, 
displayed  the  utmost  distress  and  indignation.  After  sitting  long 
in  silence,  he  fell  on  his  knees  and  made  to  God  a  passionate 
confession  of  sin  on  the  part  of  his  countrymen ;  and  during 
his  prayer  the  people  gathered  round  him,  and  began  to  share 
his  strong  emotion.  On  this,  Shecaniah,  perhaps  one  of  the 
Jews  who  had  returned  from  Elam,  rose  and  proposed  that  the 
nation,  acknowledging  the  sin  of  which  they  had  been  guilty  in 
marrying  strange  women,  should  make  a  covenant  with  God  to 
put  away  such  wives  and  the  children  bom  to  them,  and  so 
render  obedience  to  the  Law.  Ezra  then  induced  the  people  to 
swear  to  do  this ;  and  in  order  to  give  public  sanction  to  the 
measure  proposed,  an  assembly  was  proclaimed  which  all  members 
of  the  community  were  required  to  attend  on  pain  of  excom- 
munication and  the  confiscation  of  their  property.  At  this 
assembly  a  general  consent  was  given  to  Ezra's  demands;  but 
the  inclemency  of  the  weather  rendered  it  necessary  to  leave  the 
examination  of  individual  offenders  to  a  special  commission, 
assisted  by  the  elders  and  judges  of  their  several  cities.  The 
only  protest  raised  (if  the  translation  of  Ez.  x.  15  be  correct) 
came  from  Jonathan  and  Jahzeiah,  who  were  supported  by 
MeshuUam,  and  Shabbethai  the  Levite ;  but  it  was  of  no  avail. 
The  commission  sat  for  two  months,  those  recorded  to  have 
contracted  the  forbidden  unions  amounting  to  113,  among  whom 
were  certain  priests,  including  members  of  the  family  of  Jeshua. 
These  admitted  their  transgression ;  and  on  promising  to  put 
away  their  wives  and  to  offer  a  guilt-offering,  were  seemingly 
allowed  to  retain  their  priesthood. 

Ezra's    conduct    illustrates    the    spirit  of  exclusiveness  and 

*  That  Ezra  had  become  acquainted  with  the  condition  of  things  at 
Jerusalem  before  the  princes  presented  their  complaint  may  be  inferred  from 
the  fact  that  some  four  months  elapsed  between  his  arrival  at  the  city  and  the 
enquiry  made  respecting  the  prohibited  marriages,  comp.  vii.  8  with  x.  9,  and 
see  Ryle  ad  loc,  Hunter,  op.  cU.  ii.  8  foil. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       477 

aversion  towards  the  Gentiles  which  has  already  been  noticed 
as  exhibiting  itself  among  a  certain  section  of  the  Jews  in  the 
course  of  the  Exile.  The  particular  measure  to  which  it  led 
on  this  occasion  was  peculiarly  harsh,  affecting,  as  it  did,  the 
closest  family  ties.  Yet  to  a  Jewish  leader  who  believed  sincerely 
in  his  race's  vocation  and  the  pre-eminent  value  of  its  religious 
faith,  the  danger  to  which  the  latter  was  exposed,  now  that  its 
confessors  were  a  small  and  feeble  community,  deprived  of 
national  independence,  and  encompassed  on  all  sides  by  heathen 
influences,  might  seem  to  justify  the  sternest  measures  necessary 
for  preserving  its  purity  unimpaired. 

Artaxerxes,  as  has  been  related,  had  empowered  Ezra  to  take 
such  steps  as  he  might  think  expedient  for  enforcing  observance 
of  the  Law;  but  the  authority  he  had  conferred  upon  him  was 
ecclesiastical,  not  territorial;  and  he  had  given  him  no  com- 
mission to  surround  Jerusalem  with  a  wall.  It  would  seem, 
however,  that  an  attempt  to  rebuild  the  walls  of  the  city  was 
made  after  the  arrival  of  a  body  of  Jews  from  Babylon  (Ez. 
iv.  12),^  and  it  is  natural  to  identify  this  body  with  Ezra's 
company.  The  favour  with  which  he  had  been  treated  by 
Artaxerxes  might  readily  encourage  the  bolder  spirits  of  his 
party  to  renew  the  endeavour  which,  it  is  probable,  had  been 
made  once  before  (see  p.  472),  to  put  the  city  into  a  state  of 
defence,  without  waiting  for  authorisation  from  Persia.  Whether 
the  scheme  was  initiated,  or  even  approved,  by  Ezra  himself 
there  is  no  means  ot  knowing.  It  was,  in  any  case,  frustrated. 
The  hostility  of  the  Samaritans,  provoked  in  the  time  of  Zerub- 
babel,  had  not  been  extinguished ;  and  it  was  no  doubt  certain 
of  these,  Bishlam,  Mithredath,  and  Tabeel,  who  wrote  a  letter 
to  the  king  exposing  the  designs  of  the  Jews.  This  letter  was 
supported  by  another  from  Rehum  the  chancellor  and  Shimshai 
the  scribe  (who  were  probably  Persian  officials),  in  which  they 
related  that  the  Jews  who  had  come  up  from  the  king  were 
building  the  city  which  had  been  so  rebellious  in  the  past  and 
were  finishing  its  walls,  and  they  enlarged  on  the  danger  to  the 
royal  authority  in  that  region  if  the  fortifications  were  allowed 
to  be  completed.     The  appeal  thus  made  was  well  calculated 

^  On  the  section  iv.  7-23  see  p.  469. 


4/8  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  alarm  the  king's  fears.  The  reference  to  the  previous  history 
of  the  city  was  verified;  and  though  it  had,  since  its  capture 
by  Nebuchadrezzar,  peaceably  submitted  to  its  successive 
Babylonian  and  Persian  rulers,  there  were  records  to  show  that 
its  subjugation  had  been  a  task  of  much  difficulty.  Accord- 
ingly, the  letter  of  the  Persian  officers  was  answered  in  the 
terms  desired.  Directions  were  given  that  the  construction  of 
the  city  and  its  walls  should  cease  until  a  decree  authorising 
it  should  be  issued,  and  the  officials  named  above  were  charged 
to  see  that  the  royal  rescript  was  instantly  obeyed.  These 
lost  no  time  in  carrying  the  king's  orders  into  effect,  and  the 
work  upon  which  the  Jews  were  engaged  was  at  once  stopped 
by  force  {Ez.  iv.  7-23).  The  wall  already  erected  was  then 
dismantled;  and  the  gates  were  burnt  with  fire  (cf  Nih.  i.  3). 
But  more  than  material  structures  were  destroyed.  Ezra  was 
no  doubt  held,  rightly  or  wrongly,  responsible  for  the  attempt 
to  raise  the  fortifications ;  and  when  these  fell,  his  authority 
and  influence  must  have  fallen  with  them.  The  mandate  from 
the  Persian  king  could  scarcely  fail  to  intimidate  the  party 
among  the  Jews  who  had  been  foremost  in  isolating  themselves 
from  contact  with  the  Gentiles ;  whilst  those  who  had  protested 
against  Ezra's  measures  were  encouraged  to  further  opposi- 
tion. The  practice  of  marrying  foreign  women  once  more 
began  to  prevail;  and  Ezra  himself,  defeated  and  disgraced, 
withdrew  into  obscurity. 

That  Ezra's  reform  ended  in  failure,  and  that  he  himself  fell  into  disgrace 
are  not  statements  made  in  the  book  that  bears  his  name,  but  are  inferences 
drawn  from  the  need  of  a  similar  reformation  which  was  experienced  subse- 
quently by  Nehemiah  (xiii.  23  foil. ),  and  by  the  subordinate  position  which 
Ezra  occupied  on  the  occasion  of  Nehemiah's  presence  in  445  {Neh.  viii.  2 
foil.).  On  the  other  hand  some  scholars^  have  explained  the  inferior  position 
of  Ezra  in  445  by  supposing  that  his  attendance  upon  Nehemiah  at  Jeru- 
salem then  was  his  first  appearance  there,  and  that  his  visit  to  the  city  in 
the  higher  capacity  implied  in  Ez.  Wi.-x.  took  place  in  the  seventh  year  of 
Artaxerxes  II.  (Mnemon)  in  398.  This  view  pre-supposes  that  Jerusalem 
when  Ezra  proceeded  thither  was  already  walled  through  the  exertions  of 
Nehemiah  (see  below),  and  appeal  is  made  to  Ez.  ix.  9 ;  and  it  finds  support 
in  the  statement  that  Ezra  in  the  course  of  the  visit  alluded  to  entered  the 
chamber  of  Jehohanan  the  son  of  Eliashib  (x.  6),  which  most  naturally 
suggests  that  Jehohanan  was  a  contemporary  of  Ezra's ;  in  which  case  Ezra 

^  See  Van  Hoonacker,  Nehimit  et  Esdras  ;  cf.  Kent,  History  of  the  Jewish 
People ^  p.  196  foil. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       479 

must  have  been  posterior  in  date  to  Nehemiah,  who  was  contemporary  with 
Eliashib  {^Neh.  iii.  i,  xiii.  4),  Jehohanan's  grandfather  (iVM.  xii,  22).^  But 
the  ordinary  view  that  Ezra  visited  Jerusalem  before  Nehemiah  best  explains 
the  reference  in  Ez.  iv.  12  to  arrivals  from  Babylon  who  had  built  the  walls 
which  Nehemiah  heard  had  been  broken  down  {Neh.  i.  3) ;  and  is  more 
consistent  than  the  alternative  hypothesis  with  Ezra's  age.  Between  a  first 
visit  in  458  and  a  second  visit  with  Nehemiah  in  445  there  is  only  an  interval 
of  thirteen  years ;  but  between  a  first  visit  in  445  and  a  second  in  398  there 
is  an  interval  of  forty-seven ;  and  if  Ezra  in  445  is  assumed  to  have  been 
thirty,  he  must  have  been  seventy-seven  in  398,^  which  seems  too  advanced  an 
age  for  an  expedition  to  Jerusalem.  On  the  ordinary  view,  the  description  of 
the  chamber  which  Ezra  entered  as  Jehohanan's  may  be  explained  as 
attaching  to  it  at  the  time  when  the  compiler  wrote,  and  applied  to  it 
carelessly  in  connection  with  Ezra, 

If  the  view  adopted  in  the  text  be  correct,  the  unfortunate 
attempt  to  restore  the  walls  of  Jerusalem  was  not  made  until 
several  years  after  Ezra's  arrival  there  in  458;  for  it  was  not 
until  446^  that  information  of  its  failure  reached  the  ears  of 
one  of  the  most  highly  placed  of  the  Jewish  attendants  at 
the  Persian  court.  This  was  Nehemiah,  one  of  Artaxerxes' 
cup-bearers,  who  heard  of  the  destruction  of  the  walls  of  Jeru- 
salem, and  the  distress  in  which  its  people  were  plunged,  from 
his  kinsman  Hanani,  who  with  others  returned  thence  to 
Babylon.  The  news  occasioned  Nehemiah  profound  sorrow; 
and  after  confessing  to  God  his  nation's  sins,  and  praying  for 
aid,  he  determined  to  make  an  effort  to  remedy  the  disaster. 
The  ill-tidings  had  been  brought  to  him  by  Hanani  in  the  ninth 
month  (Chislev)  of  446,  and  four  months  later,  in  Nisan  the 

*  Cf.  xii.  1 1  where  Jonathan  seems  to  be  a  mistake  for  Johanan  (who  in 
ver.  23,  Ez.  x.  6  is  termed  son,  instead  of  grandson,  of  Eliashib). 

'  The  same  difficulty  (it  has  been  urged)  is  presented  by  the  mention  of 
Malchijah  the  son  of  Harim,  and  Maremoth,  the  son  of  Uriah  the  son  of 
Hakkoz,  as  prominent  personages  in  the  time  both  of  Nehemiah's  visit  and 
that  of  Ezra  {Nth,  iii.  4,  21,  Ez.  x.  31,  viii.  33),  who,  if  Ezra's  visit  was  later 
than  Nehemiah's,  must  then  have  been  very  old  men.  On  the  other  hand,  it 
has  been  argued  that  the  description  of  Meremoth  in  Ezra's  time  as  son  of 
Uriah  the  priest  (viii.  33),  whereas  in  Zerubbabel's  time  the  children  of 
Hakkoz  could  not  prove  their  priestly  ancestry  {^Ez.  ii.  61-62),  and  in 
Nehemiah's  days  Uriah's  priestly  character  was  sdll  (apparently)  unrecognised, 
is  in  favour  of  Ezra  being  subsequent  to  Nehemiah  (it  being  supposed  that  by 
the  latter's  alleged  visit  in  398  the  descendants  of  Hakkoz  had  established 
their  priestly  descent,  cf.  /  Ch.  xxiv.  10).  See  Van  Hoonacker,  Nehhnie  en 
Van  20  d'' Artaxerxes  /.,  Esdras  en  Van  7  d^ Artaxerxes  II.,  pp.  67-68. 

'  In  Artaxerxes'  nineteenth  year,  which  should  be  read  for  the  twentieth  in 
Neh.  i.  I.  Nehemiah  made  his  appeal  to  the  king  in  Nisan,  the  first  month  of 
Artaxerxes'  twentieth  year  (ii.  i),  and  therefore  the  previous  Chislev,  the  ninth 
month,  must  have  belonged  to  the  year  before. 


48o  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

first  month  of  445  it  fell  to  be  his  turn  to  wait  on  the  king* 
in  the  palace  at  Shushan.^  Artaxerxes  observed  that  his  servant 
was  sadder  than  his  wont,  and  on  enquiring  the  cause  heard 
from  Nehemiah  of  the  calamitous  condition  of  Jerusalem,  and 
encouraged  him  to  ask  a  favour.  This  Nehemiah  proceeded 
to  do,  and  requested  leave  of  absence  and  permission  to  re-build 
the  city.  The  goodwill  which  the  king  manifestly  entertained 
for  his  cup-bearer  led  him  to  grant  the  petition,  and  reverse 
the  orders  previously  sent  to  Rehum  and  Shimshai.  Leave 
of  absence  for  a  specified  period  was  given  him ;  he  was  fur- 
nished both  with  passports  through  the  intervening  provinces, 
and  with  an  escort  of  horse;  he  was  empowered  to  draw  upon 
the  royal  forest  for  timber;  and  was  invested  like  Zerubbabel 
with  the  authority  of  governor  (or  Tirshathd)  in  the  land  of 
Judah  {Neh.  v.   14,  viii.  9). 

Thus  equipped  Nehemiah  at  once  set  out  for  Jerusalem. 
On  his  arrival  he  surveyed  the  ruined  walls  ^  by  night,  and  then 

^  In  Neh.  ii.  i  in  place  of  the  words  wine  was  before  him  (the  king),  the 
LXX.  reads  koX  ^y  otvos  iywiriov  ifwv,  implying  that  it  fell  to  Nehemiah's 
turn  to  act  as  cup-bearer.  This  reading  accounts  for  the  fact  that  the  king 
had  not  observed  his  servant's  sadness  during  the  previous  four  months, 

*  The  former  capital  of  Elam,  on  the  Choaspes. 

•  The  valley  gate  from  which  Nehemiah  issued  on  his  survey  (ii.  13)  was 
probably  in  the  western  wall,  the  dung  gate  to  which  he  passed  next,  being  at 
its  S.W.  corner.  Thence  he  turned  eastward  to  \.\iq  fountain  gate  which  looked 
towards  En-rogel  (the  modern  Bir  Eyub  or  Job's  well,  in  the  ravine  S.  of 
the  city),  and  the  kings  pool  (Siloam) ;  and  then  proceeded  along  the  eastern 
wall,  bordering  the  gorge  of  the  Kidron  \the  brook  of  ver.  15).  Tlie  mention 
of  the  fountain  gate,  both  here  and  in  iii.  14-15  as  next  in  succession  to  the 
dung  gate,  though  they  were  situated  at  the  opposite  extremities  of  the 
southern  wall,  suggests  that  this  wall  was  short,  and  so  supports  the  view  that 
the  western  wall  flanked  the  Tyropceon  valley  and  that  the  city  at  this  time 
did  not  include  the  western  hill.  The  gate  J/arsitl:,  or  gsite  of  the  potsherds 
iyer.  xix.  2),  was  evidently,  like  the  dung  gate,  one  by  which  refuse  was  removed, 
and  is  probably  to  be  identified  with  the  latter.  If  the  dung  gate  opened  into 
the  Tyropoeon,  as  suggested,  the  Tyropceon  will  be  the  valley  of  Hinnom, 
since  this  ran  past  the  gate  Harsith  [Jer.  I.  c. ).  Of  the  remaining  gates  named 
in  Neh.  iiL  and  elsewhere,  the  water  gate  (presumably  near  the  spring  of 
Gihon),  and  the  horse  gate  were  in  the  eastern  wall  (iii.  26,  28,  Jer.  xxxi.  40), 
the  sheep  gate,  the  gate  of  the  guard,  and  the  gate  of  Benjamin  were  near  the 
Temple  Q^eh.  xii.  39-40,  y^rr.  xx.  2),  theyfj/^  gate,  the  old  gate,  and  the^a/tf  of 
Ephraim  {A'eh.  xii.  39)  were  probably  in  the  northern  wall  (traced  from  E.  to 
W. ),  whilst  the  corner  gate  was  presumably  at  the  angle  between  this  and  the 
western  wall  {2  Kg.  xiv.  13).  I^xo.  gate  of  Hammiphkad  {Neh.  iii.  31-32)  was 
close  to  the  sheep  gate  and  perhaps  identical  with  one  of  the  gates  already 
named  as  near  the  Temple. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       481 

suddenly  drawing  the  attention  of  the  chief  men  to  their  con- 
dition, he  placed  before  them  the  proposal  to  rebuild  them, 
and  informed   them   of   the   means  with  which  he  had   been 
provided  for  the  purpose.     His  appeal,  thus  fortified,  could  not 
fail  to  influence  his  hearers ;  and  the  work  of  re-construction  was 
resolved  upon.      News  of  it  reached  the  ears  of  the  Samaritans 
who  had  brought  about  the  failure  of  the  effort  made  under 
Ezra ;  and  their  present  leaders,  Sanballat  the  Horonite,  Tobiah 
the   Ammonite,  and   Gashmu   the   Arabian,   at   first   contented 
themselves  with  mocking  the  Jews.     But  their  taunts  did  not 
discourage  the  builders,  who  numbered  amongst  them  members 
of  all  ranks,  and  residents  in  each  of  the  neighbouring  towns. 
To  take  advantage  of  class  and  local  pride,  various  sections  of 
the  work  were  assigned  to  different  families,  to  the  inhabitants  of 
different  places,  or  to  different  trading  guilds.      The   work  in 
consequence  progressed  rapidly ;  and  to  the  dismay  of  Sanballat 
and  his  companions,  the  circumvallation  of   the  city  was  soon 
completed,  and  the  walls  raised  to  half  their  required  height. 
On  discovering  how  ineffectual  their  taunts  had  been,  the  adver- 
saries of  the  Jews  (Arabians,  Ammonites,  Ashdodites)  planned  a 
combined  attack,  hoping  to  be  able  to  overwhelm  their  victims 
before  assistance  could  be  given  by  the  Persian  authorities.     The 
position  of  Nehemiah  was  rendered  precarious  by  the  exhaus- 
tion of  his  labourers,  and  the  appeals  made  to  him  for  protection 
by  the  outlying  towns  which  had  been  denuded  of  their  able- 
bodied  citizens  engaged  at  Jerusalem,  and  which  were  growing 
fearful  for  their  own  safety.    But  he  proved  equal  to  the  situation. 
On  learning  the  designs  of  the  enemy,  he  armed  all  his  labourers, 
and  arranged  that  whilst  one  half  were  occupied  with  the  work  of 
construction,  the  other  half  should  keep  watch ;  and  he  further 
required  all  to  remain  at  night  within  the  city,  instead  of  dis- 
persing to  their  homes  that  were  situated  outside.    The  zealous  co- 
operation of  his  poorer  fellow-countrymen  in  his  undertaking  he 
secured  by  the  efforts  he  made  to  relieve  them  of  the  grievances 
under  which  they  laboured,  and  which  the  duties  he  had  im- 
posed upon  them  must  have  intensified.     The  ordinary  hardships 
of  their  lot  had  been  aggravated  by  a  famine;  and  in  order  to 
procure  the  necessaries  of  hfe  and  to  pay  the  Persian  tribute, 
2  I 


482  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

they  had  been  compelled  to  borrow  of  their  richer  neighbours. 
These  had  exacted  usury  for  the  loans  they  provided,  and  the 
needier  debtors  had  been  compelled  to  sell  not  only  their  fields 
but  even  their  families.  Their  condition  excited  the  commisera- 
tion of  Nehemiah,  who,  counting  himself  as  one  who  had  taken 
the  usury  complained  of,  proposed  that  the  practice  should  be 
universally  abandoned,  and  induced  the  nobles  and  rulers  to 
consent.  Accordingly  both  the  property  taken  in  pledge  was 
restored,  and  the  claim  to  interest^  on  loans  was  remitted. 
Nehemiah's  influence  was  further  increased  by  his  declining  to 
receive  the  supplies  customarily  due  from  the  people  to  their 
governor  (a  rule  which  he  observed  during  the  twelve  years  that 
he  held  the  office),  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  calls  upon  him  in 
the  way  of  entertaining  officials  and  Jewish  immigrants  were  very 
heavy.  Under  these  circumstances  he  found  himself  heartily 
seconded  in  the  arrangements  he  made  for  pushing  forward  the 
work;  and  the  safety  of  the  city  was  speedily  ensured.  The 
walls  were  finished  and  raised  to  their  full  height  within  the  brief 
period  of  fifty-two  days  (possibly  because  the  previous  structure 
had  only  been  breached  and  not  demolished) ;  but  the  gates  had 
not  yet  been  set  up  when  Sanballat  and  his  supporters,  relinquish- 
ing their  intentions  of  open  war,  renewed  their  antagonism  in 
a  dift'erent  form.  They  made  repeated  endeavours  to  allure 
Nehemiah  to  a  conference,  perhaps  with  the  object  of  assassinat- 
ing him,  using  as  their  final  pretext  the  prevalence  of  a  report 
to  the  effect  that  he  was  about  to  make  himself  king,  and  the 
expediency  of  their  taking  counsel  together  to  contradict  it. 
When  these  attempts  at  getting  him  into  their  power  failed,  they 
suborned  one  Shemaiah,  a  prophet  or  seer,  to  feign  that  the 
Jewish  governor  was  in  danger  of  his  life,  and  that  his  only 
resource  was  to  take  refuge  in  the  Temple,  the  conspirators  (with 
whom  many  of  the  nobles  of  Judah  were  in  correspondence) 
hoping  by  this  means  to  bring  odium  upon  their  enemy.  All 
dangers,  however,  were  successfully  avoided,  and  the  fortifications 
were  completed  on  the  twenty-fifth  of  the  sixth  month  {Elul\  in 
the  year  (444)  following  that  of  Nehemiah's  arrival.     The  duty 

^  In  Neh.  v.  1 1  the  hundredth  part  probably  means  i  per  cent,  a  month,  or 
12  per  cent,  a  year. 


THE   RETURN   FROM   THE   EXILE       483 

of  guarding  the  city  was  then  entrusted  to  Nehemiah's  relative 
Hanani  and  an  officer  called  Hananiah;^  and  strict  precautions 
were  taken  for  the  security  of  the  gates. 

As  soon  as  Nehemiah  had  rendered  Jerusalem  defensible 
against  external  aggression,  he  seized  the  first  opportunity  of 
familiarising  the  people  with  the  Mosaic  Law.  The  work  of 
collecting  and  unifying  the  mass  of  legislation  which  had  gradu- 
ally accumulated  since  the  days  of  the  great  lawgiver  had  occupied 
the  attention  of  scribes  like  Ezra  during  the  period  of  the 
captivity;  and  it  was  Ezra  himself,  emerging  from  the  obscurity 
into  which  circumstances  had  driven  him,  whom  the  governor 
employed  to  make  its  requirements  known  to  the  community. 
Before  a  vast  assemblage  gathered  near  one  of  the  gates  of  the 
city  on  the  first  day  of  the  seventh  month  (T/s/iri\^  Ezra.,  at  the 
instance  of  the  people,  began  to  read  the  book  of  the  Law,  which 
he  had  doubtless  done  much  to  compile,  whilst  a  body  of  Levites 
expounded  various  sections  of  it.  As  it  was  read,  the  people, 
realising  how  its  injunctions  had  been  unfulfilled,  broke  out  into 
weeping;  but  were  checked  by  Nehemiah,  who  bade  them  not 
mar  with  demonstrations  of  grief  a  day  that  was  holy,  and  then 
dismissed  them.  On  the  second  day,  only  the  priests,  the 
Levites,  and  the  heads  of  the  people  were  assembled  to  hear  the 
Law,  and  in  the  course  of  Ezra's  reading,  the  passage  (Lev. 
xxiii.  33-36,  39-42)  was  reached,  which  directed  the  Feast  of 
Tabernacles  in  the  seventh  month  to  be  kept  in  booths  made  of 
palms  and  willows.  Accordingly,  on  the  fifteenth  day,  the  enact- 
ment was  carried  out  (apparently  for  the  first  time,  JVe/i.  viii.  17), 
the  whole  population  dwelling  in  booths  for  the  specified  seven 
days,  and  holding  a  solemn  assembly  on  the  eighth.  During 
this  period  the  Law  was  continuously  read ;  and  at  the  conclusion 
of  the  festival,  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  the  month  a  solemn 
covenant  was  made  by  the  people  to  keep  it,  representatives  of 
the  various  classes  of  the  community  sealing  or  signing  it  on 
behalf   of  the  rest.      Among  the   duties   to  which  the   nation 

*  The  casf/e  of  which  it  is  stated  that  Hananiah  was  governor  was  on  the 
N.  of  the  Temple,  and  when  re-built  by  Herod,  was  known  as  Antonia. 

^  This,  according  to  the  Priestly  code,  was  the  Feast  of  Trumpets  {Lev.  xxiii. 
24).     The  year  in  question  was  probably  444. 


484  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

particularly  pledged  themselves  were  (i)  abstention  from  inter- 
marriage with  the  people  of  the  land,  (2)  abstention  from  traffic 
on  the  Sabbath,  (3)  the  suspension  of  tillage,  and  the  release  of 
debts  during  the  Sabbatical  year,  (4)  provision  for  the  sacrifices 
of  the  sanctuary  by  the  yearly  contribution  of  one-third  of  a 
shekel,  (5)  payment  to  the  priests  of  their  dues  of  first-fruits  and 
firstlings,  and  to  the  Levites  of  their  tithes. 

It  was  after  this  (if  the  order  of  the  narrative  in  the  book  of 
Nehemiah  follows  the  chronological  succession  of  events)  that 
measures  were  taken  to  supplement  the  deficiency  of  population 
in  the  newly-fortified  city  which  endangered  its  security.  The 
Jewish  community  was  settled  chiefly  in  the  provincial  towns, 
which  had  considerably  increased  since  the  time  of  Zerubbabel  ;^ 
and  the  capital  had  not  attracted  inhabitants  to  it  in  any  large 
numbers.  In  order  therefore  to  provide  it  with  citizens,  it  was 
resolved  that  one-tenth  (determined  by  lot)  of  the  whole  Jewish 
population  of  the  country  should  dwell  within  it,  a  certain  pro- 
portion offering  themselves  voluntarily.  When  this  was  done,  the 
walls  of  the  city  were  solemnly  dedicated,  each  of  two  processions 
compassing  respectively  half  the  circuit  of  the  ramparts,  and 
meeting,  seemingly,  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Temple. 

In  433  Nehemiah  left  Jerusalem  and  went  back  to  the  Persian 
court.  The  length  of  his  stay  there  is  described  in  very  vague 
terms  {Neh.  xiii.  6) ;  but  it  seems  to  have  been  long  enough  to 
allow  a  number  of  abuses  to  reappear  in  Jerusalem.  He  eventu- 
ally obtained  leave  to  return  thither  once  more;  and  again  re- 
newed the  work  of  reform.  He  found,  in  the  first  place,  that 
the  Temple  had  been  desecrated,  and  the  provisions  made  for 
the  support  of  its  ministers  ignored.  Eliashib  the  priest,  who  had 
become  a  friend  of  Nehemiah's  adversary  Tobiah,  had  prepared 
for  the  use  of  the  latter  one  of  the  chambers  attached  to  the 
Temple,  where  the  provisions  for  the  Levites  should  have  been 
stored,  the  Levites,  in  consequence,  having  to  relinquish  their 

*  Even  if  the  list  of  towns  given  in  Neh.  x\.  25-36  as  occupied  at  this  time 
be  suspected  to  refer  to  a  later  period  (see  Ryle  ad  loc. ),  on  the  ground  that 
it  so  greatly  exceeds  the  number  of  those  whose  inhabitants  took  part  in  the 
building  of  the  walls,  yet  many  of  these  latter  {e.g.  Tekoa,  Zanoah,  Beth- 
haccerem,  Mizpah,  Bethzur,  Keilah)  are  not  mentioned  amongst  the  towns 
occupied  in  the  time  of  Zerubbabel  {fiz,  ii.  20-35). 


THE  RETURN  FROM  THE  EXILE       485 

duties  in  order  to  support  themselves.  Nehemiah  ejected  the 
goods  of  Tobiah  and  cleansed  the  chamber;  and  then  made 
arrangements  for  the  supply  and  safe-keeping  of  the  tithes  due 
to  the  Levites,  singers,  and  other  ministers.  He  discovered  also 
that  the  practice  of  trading  on  the  Sabbath  had  become  prevalent; 
and  in  order  to  put  an  end  to  it,  directed  that  the  city-gates 
should  be  closed  in  the  evening  before  the  Sabbath  and  not 
opened  until  it  was  ended,  committing  the  guard  of  them  first 
to  some  of  his  own  servants,  and  then  to  a  body  of  Levites. 
He  also  learnt  that  intermarriages  between  Jews  and  heathens 
(Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Ashdodites)  had  again  become 
common,  the  offspring  of  such  marriages  growing  up  in  ignor 
ance  of  the  Jewish  tongue.  A  conspicuous  example  of  these 
unions  was  that  of  one  of  the  sons  of  Joiada,  son  of  the  high 
priest  Eliashib,  who  had  wedded  the  daughter  of  Sanballat. 
Nehemiah,  on  arriving  at  the  capital,  took  immediate  steps  to 
suppress  the  disorders.  Upon  some  of  the  offenders  he  inflicted 
personal  violence,  smiting  them  in  his  anger,  and  plucking  off 
their  hair.  The  son  of  Joiada  (called  by  Josephus  Manasseh), 
who  refused  to  put  away  his  wife,  he  expelled  from  his  office. 
If  Josephus  {Ant.  xi.  8,  2)  may  be  trusted  further,  though  he 
seems  to  have  misdated  the  incident,^  Manasseh  was  induced 
by  his  father-in-law  to  join  him  at  Samaria  by  the  promise  of 
being  appointed  high-priest  of  a  temple  that  was  to  be  built  on 
Gerizim.  Nehemiah  having  thus  punished  those  who  had  con- 
tracted the  forbidden  alliances,  then  proceeded  to  adopt  such 
measures  as  were  required  for  the  better  organisation  of  the 
Temple-service, 

At  this  point  the  history  of  Nehemiah  breaks  off,  and  nothing 
further  is  known  of  his  career.  His  success  as  an  administrator, 
though  not,  as  has  just  been  seen,  uninterrupted,  was  more  com- 
plete than  that  achieved  by  Ezra  in  virtue  of  the  fact  that  he 
was  both  invested  with  more  regular  authority  and  endowed  with 
more  statesmanlike  qualities.  Unyielding  in  the  face  of  open 
opposition  and   peremptory  towards   the  disloyal,  he  was  able 

*  Josephus  makes  Manasseh  not  the  grandson  but  the  great-grandson,  of 
Eliashib,  and  brother  of  Jaddua  (see  Neh.  xii.  22)  who  was  high-priest  in  the 
time  of  Alexander  (more  than  100  years  afterwards). 


486  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

to  inspire  confidence  and  zeal  in  his  subordinates;  and  in 
difficult  circumstances  he  showed  that  he  possessed  in  equal 
degrees  the  qualities  of  caution  and  decisiveness.  Natural  gifts 
of  prudence  and  discretion  had,  no  doubt,  been  improved  during 
his  residence  at  the  Persian  court;  and  the  tact  with  which  he 
acquired  and  retained  the  favour  of  the  Persian  king  was  a 
principal  factor  in  the  fortunate  issue  of  his  schemes.  On  the 
other  hand,  Ezra,  who  is  said  by  Josephus  {Anf.  xi.  5,  5)  to  have 
died  at  an  advanced  age,  and  to  have  been  buried  with  great 
magnificence  at  Jerusalem,  was  less  a  man  of  action  than  a 
student,  and  in  affairs  was  much  better  qualified  to  be  a  subordi- 
nate than  to  lead.  Yet  so  completely  did  the  Law  come  to  dwarf 
everything  else  in  the  estimate  of  the  later  Jews  that  Ezra  the 
Scribe  ultimately  filled  a  larger  place  in  the  minds  of  his  country- 
men than  did  Nehemiah  the  re-builder  of  Jerusalem;  and  so 
eminent  did  his  reputation  become  that  around  his  name  many 
remarkable  legends  gathered. 

To  the  history  of  the  Jewish  people  subsequent  to  the  times 
of  Ezra  and  Nehemiah  references  in  the  O.T.  only  occur  in 
Daniel  and  (probably)  in  certain  of  the  Psalms  and  some  small 
sections  of  the  prophetical  books ;  and  it  will  therefore  suffice  to 
describe  it  very  briefly  during  the  period  covered  by  such  allusions. 
The  succession  of  the  Persian  kings  after  Artaxerxes  I. 
(Longimanus),  who  died  in  424,  was  as  follows: — 
Xerxes  II.  .        .     424  (2  mo.) 

Sogdianus  .        .     424-423 

Darius  II.  (Nothus)  .  423-405 
Artaxerxes  II.  (Mnemon)  405-358 
Artaxerxes  III.  (Ochus).  358-337 
Arses        .  .         .     337-335 

Darius  III.  (Codomannus)   335-330 

The  only  noteworthy  event  connected  with  the  Jewish  people 
during  the  rule  of  these  kings  took  place  in  the  reign  of  Arta- 
xerxes II.  or  Artaxerxes  III.  According  to  Josephus  {Ant.  xi.  7) 
the  then  High  Priest  John  (the  Johanan  of  Neh.  xii.  22),  grand- 
son of  Eliashib,  the  contemporary  of  Nehemiah,  had  a  brother 
Joshua,  who,  relying  on  the  support  of  Bagoses  the  general  of 
Artaxerxes,  hoped  to  supplant  John  in  his  office.     In  the  course 


THE   RETURN   FROM  THE  EXILE       487 

of  a  quarrel  between  them  John  slew  his  brother  in  the  Temple 
itself;  and  in  consequence  Bagoses  forced  his  way  into  the 
building,  required  a  tax  to  be  paid  for  every  victim  offered  in 
the  daily  sacrifice,  and  punished  the  Jews  seven  years.  By  some 
authorities  it  has  been  supposed  that  this  chastisement  of  the 
Jews  was  really  the  result  of  their  participation  in  a  rebellion 
raised  against  Artaxerxes  III.  (Ochus)  by  Zidon  and  some  other 
of  the  Phoenician  states,  which  was  suppressed  with  great 
severity.  On  this  occasion  many  Jews  are  said  to  have  been 
made  captive  and  deported  to  distant  regions  like  Hyrcania. 
A  relief  to  the  sufferings  thus  endured  seemed  to  be  offered  by 
the  invasion  of  Persia  in  the  reign  of  Darius  III.  (Codomannus) 
by  the  Greek  Alexander;  and  the  prospect  of  it  is  by  certain 
scholars  thought  to  have  inspired  the  prophecy  contained  in 
"Is"  xxiv.-xxvii.^  Darius  III.  is  the  last  of  the  four  Persian 
kings  alluded  to  in  Dan.  xi.  2.  He  was  defeated  successively 
by  Alexander  (who  is  the  subject  of  the  description  in  Dan.  xi.  3) 
at  the  battles  of  the  Granicus  (334  B.C.),  Issus  (333  B.C.)  and 
Arbela  (331  B.C.);  and  with  him  the  Persian  empire  came  to 
an  end  (cf  Dan.  viii.  3-7,  20-21).  With  the  downfall  of  Persia, 
its  dependent  provinces  passed  under  the  power  of  the  con- 
queror ;  and  Alexander,  who  after  the  victory  at  Issus,  marched 
through  Phoenicia  and  Palestine,  and  captured  Tyre  and  Gaza, 
is  said  to  have  paid  a  personal  visit  to  Jerusalem. 

Josephus  {Ant.  xi.  8,  3-5)  who  is  the  authority  for  the  story,  relates  that 
during  the  siege  of  Tyre  Alexander  demanded  of  the  high  priest  Jaddua 
{Neh.  xii.  22)  that  he  should  reUnquish  his  allegiance  to  Darius,  and  on  his 
refusing,  advanced,  after  the  capture  of  Gaza,  towards  Jerusalem.  Jaddua 
in  obedience  to  a  dream,  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  a  procession  of  priests 
to  meet  the  king,  who,  on  seeing  the  high  priest  wearing  his  mitre  with  the 
Divine  name  engraved  on  it  (see  Ex.  xxxix.  30-31),  saluted  it,  and  on  being 
asked  by  one  of  his  courtiers  why  he  should  salute  the  high  priest  of  the 
Jews,  replied  that  he  saluted  not  the  priest,  but  the  God  whose  minister  he 
was ;  and  that  such  a  figure  had  once  appeared  to  him  in  a  vision  promising 
him  success  against  the  Persians.  He  subsequently  visited  the  Temple, 
offered  sacrifice  there,  according  to  the  priest's  directions,  and  was  shown 
the  prophecies  of  Daniel  (viii.  20,  21),  which  he  applied  to  himself;  and 
allowed  the  Jews,  in  answer  to  their  requests,  to  enjoy  the  laws  of  their 
forefathers,  and  to  be  exempt  from  tribute  every  seventh  year. 

The  truth  of  this  narrative  has  been  questioned  on  the  ground  that  there 
's  no  other  evidence  that  Alexander  diverged  to  Jerusalem,  when  passing 
from  Gaza  to  Egypt. 

*  See  Cheyne,  Isaiah  (Polychrome  Bible)  p.  204;  but  cf.  above,  p.  469,  note. 


488  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Alexander  died  in  323  B.C.,  and  his  empire  was  partitioned 
between  his  principal  generals  (an  event  described  in  Dan. 
viii.  22,  xi.  4).  Of  the  resultant  kingdoms,  Syria  and  Egypt 
were  the  two  with  whose  fortunes  the  further  history  of  the  Jewish 
people  became  connected.  Egypt  fell  to  Ptolemy  I.  (Soter)  who 
became  king  in  322 ;  whilst  ten  years  afterwards  Seleucus  L 
(Nicator)  made  himself  ruler  of  Syria.  The  succession  of 
Egyptian  and  Syrian  sovereigns  is  given  in  the  following  table : — 


Egypt. 

B.C. 

Syria. 

Ptolemy  I.  (Soter) 

322 

312 

Seleucus  L  (Nicator) 

Ptolemy  n.  (Philadelphus) 

1  285 

280 

Antiochus  L  (Soter) 

261 

Antiochus  IL  (Theos) 

Ptolemy  III.  (Euergetes) 

246 

Seleucus  II.  (Callinicus) 

226 

Seleucus  HI. 

224 

Antiochus  III.  (the  Great) 

Ptolemy  IV.  (Philopator) 

221 

Ptolemy  V.  (Epiphanes) 

205 

187 

Seleucus  IV.  (Philopator) 

Ptolemy  VI.  (Philometor) 

181 

175 

Antiochus  IV.  (Epiphanes) 

Ptolemy  VIL  (Physcon) 

146 

The  mutual  relations  between  these  two  lines  of  kings  are 
obscurely  reflected  in  Dan.  xi.  Ptolemy  I.  is  the  king  of  the  south 
of  verse  5,  whilst  the  prince  destined  to  be  strong  above  him  (see 
marg.)  has  been  identified  with  Seleucus  I.  One  of  the  latter's 
successors,  Antiochus  IL,  is  the  king  of  the  fwrth  of  verse  6.  As 
is  there  described,  he  repudiated  his  first  wife  Laodice  and 
married  Berenice  the  daughter  of  Ptolemy  II.  The  peace  thus 
secured  came  to  an  end  in  the  reigns  of  these  princes*  successors. 
Ptolemy  III.,  the  brother  of  Berenice  (who  had  been  divorced  by 
Antiochus),  attacked  Seleucus  IL,  seized  Seleucia  the  port  of 
Antioch  (the  fortress  of  verse  7),  and  carried  oflf  great  booty 
(ver.  8) ;  whilst  the  attempt  which  Seleucus  made  to  avenge  this 
invasion  proved  abortive  (ver.  9).  In  the  subsequent  war,  which 
continued  through  more  than  one  reign,  Judaea  became  involved. 


THE  RETURN   FROM   THE  EXILE      489 

On  Alexander's  death  it  had  been  seized  by  Ptolemy  I.,  who 
entered  Jerusalem  treacherously  on  the  Sabbath-day ;  but  though, 
according  to  Josephus  {Ant.  xii.  i),  it  was  treated  cruelly  by  him, 
it  enjoyed  tranquillity  throughout  his  reign  and  those  of  his  two 
imnicdiate  successors,  of  whom  Ptolemy  II.  (Philadelphus)  pro- 
cured the  translation  of  the  books  of  the  Law  into  Greek.  But 
under  Ptolemy  IV.  (Philopator)  its  good  fortune  underwent  a 
change.  In  the  course  of  the  war  between  Egypt  and  Syria,  it 
alternately  became  the  prey  of  both  the  contending  powers, 
for  success  wavered  from  side  to  side.  Eventually,  however, 
Ptolemy  defeated  Antiochus  III.  (cf.  Dan.  xi.  11- 12  marg.),  and 
became  master  of  Judaea;  whilst  his  son  Ptolemy  V.  sent  his 
general  Scopas  to  reduce  Coele  Syria.  Scopas,  however,  was 
defeated  by  Antiochus  III.  with  great  loss;  and  the  latter,  on 
reaching  Jerusalem,  was  welcomed  by  the  inhabitants.  But 
whatever  hopes  the  success  of  Antiochus  may  have  inspired  in 
the  Jews  were  disappointed,  for  the  Syrian  king  proved  himself 
an  arbitrary  ruler.  After  futile  negotiations  with  Ptolemy 
Epiphanes,  to  whom  he  proposed  to  give  his  daughter  Cleopatra 
(cf.  Dan,  xi.  17  marg.),  Judaea  being  included  in  her  dowry,  he 
became  involved  in  hostilities  with  Rome,  sustaining  disaster  in 
the  battle  of  Magnesia,  190  B.C.  (cf.  Dan.  xi.  18) ;  and  in  order  to 
meet  the  demands  imposed  upon  him,  attempted  to  seize  the 
treasures  of  the  temple  of  Bel  in  Elymais  (Elam)  but  lost  his  life 
there  (cf.  Dan.  xi.  19).  His  successor  Seleucus  IV.  (Philopator), 
when  pressed,  hke  his  father,  by  the  Roman  exactions,  sought 
similar  means  to  satisfy  them.  His  chancellor  HeHodorus  was 
sent  to  take  possession  of  the  wealth  which  was  reputed  to  be  in 
the  Temple  at  Jerusalem;  but  is  related  to  have  been  en- 
countered by  a  celestial  apparition,  a  horseman  in  armour  of 
gold,  whose  two  attendants  scourged  the  intruder  and  dismissed 
him  to  his  master  {2  Mac.  c.  iii.,  cf.  Dan.  xi.  20).  Seleucus  was 
subsequently  murdered  by  Heliodorus,  and  was  succeeded  by  his 
younger  brother  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  had  been  a  hostage 
at  Rome  and  had  not  been  looked  upon  as  heir  to  the  throne. 
Between  him  and  Ptolemy  Philometor  war  broke  out,  and  the 
latter  was  defeated  at  Pelusium  in  170  B.C.  (7  Mac.  i.  16-19,  cf. 
Dan.  xi.  25);  though,  later,  Antiochus  was  compelled  by  the 


490  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

Romans  to  evacuate  Egypt  and  come  to  terms  with  Ptolemy. 
Towards  the  Jews  he  acted  with  great  barbarity.  An  effort  was 
made  to  Hellenise  them,  which  certain  of  the  Jews  themselves 
from  interested  motives  supported  (i  Mac.  i.  ii,  2  Mac.  iv.  7 
foil.);  and  ultimately  Antiochus  being  led  to  fear  a  revolt, 
ordered  a  massacre  which  lasted  three  days  (in  which  80,000 
are  said  to  have  perished),^  and  then  entering  the  Temple, 
pillaged  it  of  its  sacred  vessels  and  other  treasures  {2  Mac.  v.  1 1 
foil).  A  second  invasion  of  Egjrpt  was  rendered  abortive  by  the 
intervention  of  the  Romans  {Dan.  xi.  29-30);  and  this  was 
followed  by  a  renewed  persecution  of  the  Jews  in  168  B.C.  He 
determined  to  suppress  the  Jewish  worship,  the  rite  of  circum- 
cision, and  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath  ;  the  books  of  the  Law 
were  destroyed;  the  Temple  was  desecrated,  and  called  by  the 
name  of  Zeus  Olympius,  to  whom  an  altar  was  erected  above 
the  altar  of  burnt-offering ;  and  a  feast  of  Dionysus  was  kept,  in 
which  the  Jews  were  compelled  to  participate  (z  Mcu.  i.  54  foil., 
2  Mac.  vi.  i-ii,  Dan.  xi.  31).  Many  Jews,  however,  defied  the 
king's  orders,  and  in  maintaining  the  injunctions  of  the  Law 
faced  torture  and  death  with  the  greatest  heroism  (cf.  Dan.  xi.  33). 
And  the  resistance  offered  was  not  passive  only.  An  armed 
revolt  was  initiated  by  Mattathias,  a  man  of  priestly  family  who 
lived  at  Modin,  a  place  fifteen  miles  N.W.  of  Jerusalem.  At  his 
death  he  appointed  his  son  Judas,  sumamed  Maccabaeus,  to 
head  the  forces  which  had  gathered  round  him ;  and  from  him 
the  war  that  ensued  obtained  the  name  by  which  it  is  generally 
known.  It  was  marked  by  several  signal  successes  on  the  part  of 
the  patriot  army  (cf.  Dan.  xi.  32  and  34) ;  and  finally  in  165  B.a 
Jerusalem  was  re-entered,  the  Temple  cleansed,  and  the  sacrifices 
renewed  {i  Mac.  iv.  36  foil,  2  Mac.  x.  i  foil).  Antiochus  is 
related  to  have  died  in  great  agony  in  Persia,  having  been  pre- 
viously smitten  with  remorse  for  his  cruelty  towards  the  Jews 
{2  Mac.  c.  ix.). 

*  The  number  is  probably  much  exaggerated 


CHAPTER  XV 
RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN 

THE  period  of  Jewish  history  subsequent  to  the  Return 
which  is  included  in  the  O.T.  is  a  rather  protracted  one, 
extending  from  536  to  the  first  half  of  the  second  century 
B.C.  (if  this  be  the  date  of  the  book  of  Daniel).  Two  foreign 
powers  were  successively  predominant  during  it,  namely,  the 
Persians  and  the  Greeks;  and  according  to  the  plan  hitherto 
followed  it  might  seem  expedient  to  subdivide  it  into  two  corre- 
sponding sections  for  the  purposes  of  comparison.  But  the 
precise  date  of  many  of  the  compositions  from  which  conclusions 
respecting  the  religion  of  the  time  must  be  drawn  is  so  uncertain 
that  it  appears  preferable  to  compare  the  period  as  a  whole  with 
those  that  preceded  it,  without  attempting  a  more  minute 
chronological  study. 

One  of  the  principal  features  which  distinguish  this  age  from 
those  that  went  before  it  is  the  increased  importance  of  the  Law 
and  the  decreasing  importance  of  Prophecy.  Prophets,  indeed, 
were  not  entirely  lacking  in  the  restored  community;  but  their 
numbers  were  comparatively  scanty,  their  writings  inconsiderable, 
and  their  intellectual  force,  on  the  whole,  inferior.  The  extinc- 
tion of  Jewish  national  existence  by  the  fall  of  Jerusalem  had 
closed  the  sphere  within  which  prophecy  had  previously  been 
most  active  ;  and  the  life  to  which  the  nation,  at  the  Return,  was 
restored,  lacking  as  it  was  in  political  independence,  was  restricted 
and  poor,  with  the  result  that  the  external  condition  of  the  people 
was  reflected  in  the  character  of  the  prophetic  appeals  addressed 
to  it.  The  claims  of  religion  and  morals  were  enforced  as  they 
had  ever  been,  but  the  duties  which  now  appeared  most  pressing 
were  not  always  those  which  were  inculcated  in  earlier  times.     In 

491 


492  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

consequence  of  the  circumscribed  range  of  national  interests, 
ecclesiastical  institutions  and  arrangements  became  of  much 
more  importance  and  attracted  much  greater  attention  than  had 
been  the  case  before;  and  though  the  prophets  of  this  period 
never  failed  to  set  before  their  countrymen  a  high  standard  of 
social  obligation,  they  also  laid  an  unwonted,  though  under  the 
circumstances  a  perfectly  natural,  stress  upon  the  external  ordin- 
ances of  religion.  But  their  functions  in  this  respect  were  before 
long  rendered  comparatively  superfluous  by  the  establishment,  as 
an  authoritative  standard  in  religious  worship,  of  the  extensive 
and  detailed  code  of  legislation  published  in  444  B.C.,  whose 
official  guardians,  the  Priests  and  Scribes,  succeeded  to  the 
influence  once  exercised  in  Israel  by  the  prophetic  order.  The 
existence  of  a  considerable  body  of  statutes  professing  to  be 
derived  from  Moses  could  scarcely  fail  further  to  limit  the  field 
within  which  the  spontaneity  of  prophecy  still  found  scope.  A 
law-book,  indeed,  had  co-existed  with  Jeremiah  and  his  con- 
temporaries; and  even  before  that  time,  written  documents  had 
been  current  claiming  to  go  back  to  the  Mosaic  age.  But  the 
compass  of  these  was  small  compared  with  the  book  of  the  Law 
promulgated  by  Nehemiah  and  Ezra ;  and  as  the  very  extent  and 
comprehensiveness  of  this  would  seem  to  diminish  the  necessity 
of  prophetic  instruction,  so  the  measures  taken  to  make  its  con- 
tents known  would  lessen  the  need  of  prophetic  exhortations. 

That  Ezra's  law-book  embraced  practically  the  whole  of  the 
Pentateuch  is  probable  for  more  reasons  than  one.  In  the  first 
place,  the  account  of  the  time  occupied  in  reading  it  to  the 
people  {Neh.  viii.  18)  implies  that  it  was  of  considerable  length, 
and  contrasts  strikingly  with  what  is  related  about  the  public 
reading  of  the  book  {Deuteronomy)  found  in  the  Temple  in  the 
reign  of  Josiah  {2  Kg.  xxiii.  2).  And,  secondly,  the  articles  of 
the  covenant  ratified  by  the  community  in  accordance  with  the 
requirements  of  the  book  (see  Neh.  x.  29-39)  agree  with  passages 
m  each  of  the  three  codes  which  the  Pentateuch  contains.^  For 
example,  the  pledges  to  refrain  from  intermarriage  with  the 
peoples  of  the  land,  to  forgo  the  produce  of  the  seventh  year, 
and  to  remit  the  exaction  of  every  debt  during  the  same  year, 
*  Cf.  Hunter,  After  the  Exile ^  ii.  p.  225. 


RELIGION   AFTER   THE   RETURN       493 

accord  respectively  with  Deut.  vii.  3,  Ex.  xxiii.  10- 11  (J  E),  and 
Deuf.  XV.  1-2.  The  mention  of  the  supplies  necessary  for  the 
continual  meal  offering  and  for  the  continual  burnt-offering,  and 
for  the  regular  sacrifices  on  the  Sabbaths,  the  new  moons,  and  the 
set  feasts,  implies  the  regulations  contained  in  ^«/«.xxviii.,xxix.  (P). 
The  offering  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  ground  is  enjoined  in  Ex. 
xxiii.  19  (JE),  but  the  offering  of  the  first-fruits  of  the  dough  is 
specifically  required  only  in  Num.  xv.  20,  21  (P).  Finally,  the 
direction  to  the  Levites  to  bring  up  to  the  house  of  God  for  the 
use  of  the  Priests  the  tithe  of  the  tithes  received  by  themselves 
from  the  people  occurs  in  Num.  xviii.  26-28  (P).  On  the  other 
hand,  a  few  minor  differences  between  the  requirements  enumer- 
ated in  Neh.  x.  and  the  corresponding  ones  in  the  Pentateuch 
suggest  that  the  latter  had  not  yet  assumed  its  present  form  in 
every  particular.  Thus  the  yearly  charge  imposed  on  everyone 
for  the  service  of  the  Temple  was  fixed  by  Nehemiah  at  a  third 
of  a  shekel,  whereas  in  Ex.  xxx.  11-16  (P)  it  is  a  half-shekel, 
whilst  the  tithe  for  the  maintenance  of  the  Levites  was  taken 
from  the  products  of  the  ground  only,  no  mention  being  made  of 
a  tithe  from  the  herd  or  the  flock,  as  in  Lev.  xxvii.  32  (P).  The 
regulation  enjoining  a  supply  of  wood  for  the  Temple  sacrifices 
{Neh.  x.  34)  may  doubtless  be  considered  to  be  implied  in  Lev. 
vi.  12;  and  the  prohibition  against  buying  and  selling  on  the 
Sabbath  and  holy  days  (ver.  31)  is  virtually  covered  by  the  laws 
forbidding  labour  on  the  Sabbath;  but  the  actual  commands 
themselves  do  not  occur  in  the  existing  Pentateuch. 

The  Priestly  code  which  now  for  the  first  time  seems  to  have 
been  formulated  and  enforced,  and  the  principal  contents  of 
which  have  been  given  in  a  previous  chapter  (see  c.V.)  is  charac- 
terised by  (i)  an  elaborate  sacrificial  system,  in  which  piacular 
offerings  fill  a  large  space,  (2)  an  extensive  series  of  festivals  and 
holy-days,  the  observance  of  the  three  principal  feasts  being 
appointed  for  certain  fixed  periods  instead  of  being  left  to  depend 
upon  the  operations  of  the  agricultural  year  (as  seems  to  have 
been  the  case  in  the  Book  of  the  Covenant),  (3)  the  restriction 
of  the  priesthood  to  the  sons  of  Aaron,  (4)  a  great  extension  of 
the  dues  to  be  paid  to  the  priestly  order.  The  limitation  of  the 
sacerdotal  office  to  the  descendants  of  Aaron   seems  to  have 


494  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

originated  in  an  injunction  of  the  prophet  Ezekiel.  Up  to  his 
time  the  whole  body  of  Levites  had  been  invested  with  a  priestly 
character.  But  many  of  them  had  taken  part  in  the  idolatry 
which  had  been  so  prevalent  during  the  closing  years  of  the 
Monarchy  (chiefly,  no  doubt,  at  the  provincial  "  high  places ") ; 
and  in  consequence  the  prophet  directed  their  exclusion  from  the 
priestly  office,  confining  them  to  the  discharge  of  the  inferior 
duties  of  the  sanctuary.  The  higher  services  were  entrusted  to 
the  sons  of  Zadok  alone  (descended  from  Eleazar,  the  third  son 
of  Aaron)  since  they  had  remained  faithful  when  their  brethren 
went  astray.  It  seems  reasonable  to  assume  that  these  had  been 
attached  to  the  Temple  at  Jerusalem,  where  the  worship  of 
Jehovah  was  probably  less  contaminated  by  foreign  elements 
than  elsewhere.  In  the  Pentateuchal  code  the  priesthood  is  in 
appearance  less  circumscribed  than  in  Ezekiel^  and  is  shared  by 
all  the  descendants  of  Aaron.  But  of  Aaron's  four  children, 
Nadab  and  Abihu  are  related  to  have  perished  before  their  father, 
and  by  the  time  of  Ezekiel  the  line  of  Ithamar  had  possibly 
become  insignificant,  if  not  altogether  extinct  (cf.  i  Sam.  ii.  33). 

The  primary  motive  which  led  to  the  imposition  upon  the 
people  of  so  rigid  a  legal  system  as  that  of  the  Priestly  code  was 
the  same  which  produced  the  scheme  of  ecclesiastical  polity  out- 
lined by  Ezekiel  (see  p.  456),  namely,  an  exalted  conception  of 
the  Divine  holiness,  and  the  necessity  of  guarding  against  any 
profanation  of  it.  The  study  among  the  exiles  in  Babylon  of  the 
traditional  and  historical  memorials  of  their  race  had  helped  to 
deepen  the  fear  of  impiety  instilled  in  them  by  the  actual  experi- 
ence of  half  a  century  of  chastisement  \  and  the  nation's  leaders 
now  made  it  their  first  object  to  prevent  the  errors  of  the  past 
from  being  repeated.  In  the  collective  legislation  which  was 
intended  to  secure  this,  moral  precepts  were  by  no  means 
lacking ;  for  it  incorporated  the  earlier  codes,  which  dealt  mainly 
with  social  life,  whilst  many  of  the  enactments  contained  in 
these  were  renewed  and  expanded  in  the  later  laws.  But  not- 
withstanding the  spiritual  ideas  developed  by  the  pre-exilic  and 
exilic  prophets  concerning  the  attributes  and  requirements  of 
Jehovah,  it  was  inevitable  that  local  and  material  notions  of 
sanctity  should  persist  in  regard  to  Him,  and  find  expression  in 


RELIGION   AFTER   THE   RETURN        495 

ceremonial  regulations,  so  long  as  His  presence  was  pre-eminently 
associated  with  Jerusalem  and  its  Temple ;  and  prophetic  teach- 
ing had  not  discountenanced  such  a  belief.  And  the  belief  had 
this  justification,  that  the  people  and  institutions  of  Israel  were 
still  at  this  epoch,  as  they  had  been  in  the  past,  the  principal 
channel  of  God's  revelation.  That  the  hour  ultimately  came 
when  it  ceased  to  be  true,  though  the  Jews  continued  to  hold  it 
so,  only  illustrates  the  progressive  character  of  the  Divine  self- 
manifestation  and  the  slowness  of  men's  minds  to  comprehend  it. 
But  at  the  time  now  under  consideration,  that  hour  had  not  yet 
arrived ;  and  for  the  conservation  of  Israel  as  the  depository  of 
true  religion,  as  then  disclosed,  a  strict  ecclesiastical  organisation, 
in  the  absence  of  political  independence,  was  really  essential 
The  adoption  by  the  Jewish  people  of  so  burdensome  a  system 
was  not,  indeed,  calculated  to  promote  that  early  conversion  of 
the  Gentile  nations  to  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  which  certain  of 
the  prophets  had  predicted.  But  the  dreams  of  the  future  had 
to  be  subordinated  to  the  exigencies  of  the  present;  and  the 
legislators  of  the  re-established  community  were  more  concerned 
to  maintain  the  faith  of  Jehovah  in  Israel  itself  than  to  extend  it 
amongst  aliens.  At  the  same  time,  the  admission  into  Israel  of 
proselytes  from  heathendom  was  recognised  in  the  Law ;  and  by 
it  Hke  privileges  and  responsibilities  were  bestowed  upon  both 
native  Israelites  and  the  strangers  who  attached  themselves  to 
them  {^Lev.  xvii.  8,  10,  13,  Num.  ix.  14,  Ex.  xii.  48-49 ;  cf.  Ezek, 
xlvii.  22,  "A"  Ixvi.  20-21). 

The  religious  worship  conducted  in  the  restored  Temple  was 
accompanied  by  music  and  song;  and  the  period  following  the 
Return  from  the  Exile  probably  witnessed  a  great  development  of 
psalmody.  There  seems  no  reason,  indeed,  for  disbelieving  that 
many  of  the  psalms  in  the  existing  collection  go  back  to  the  time 
of  the  Monarchy  and  the  first  Temple ;  and  several  of  them  seem 
to  be  peculiarly  appropriate  to  various  occasions  in  the  earlier 
history.^  But  other  psalms  are  manifestly  the  product  of  the 
time  immediately  succeeding  the  Restoration,  amongst  such 
being  Ixxxv.  and  cxxvi.  The  psalms  of  a  liturgical  character 
with  which  the  Psalter  concludes  (cxlvi.-cl.)  are  likewise,  in 
all  probability,  part  of  the  hymn-book  of  the  Second  Temple. 

^  See  p.  17. 


496  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

It  is  doubtless  post-exilic  usage  which  the  writer  of  Chronichi 
has  reproduced  in  his  description  of  the  singing  which  accom- 
panied the  removal  of  the  Ark  from  the  house  of  Obed-edom  to 
the  tent  pitched  for  it  by  David  (/  Ch,  c.  xvi.),  transferring  to  the 
time  of  that  king  arrangements  which  prevailed  in  his  own  age ; 
mdeed,  one  of  the  psalms  quoted  as  sung  on  that  occasion  bears 
on  its  face  evidence  of  its  exilic  origin  (j  Ch.  xvi.  35-36  = 
Ps.  cvi.  47-48).  The  depth  of  feeling  which  so  many  of  the 
psalms  of  this  period  express  serves  to  correct  the  superficial 
impression  produced  by  the  Priestly  legislation  that  post-exilic 
religion  was  altogether  formal  and  joyless,  and  makes  it  evident 
that  the  ceremonialism  of  the  Law  could  excite  and  sustain 
earnest  faith  and  impassioned  devotion. 

Of  the  prophets  of  this  period,  the  two  whose  date  is  accu- 
rately known,  namely  Haggai  and  Zeehariah  (a  i.-viii.),  lived 
before  the  promulgation  of  the  Law  by  Ezra;  whilst  Malachi 
was  probably  contemporary  with  the  last-named,  and  prophesied 
either  shortly  before  or  shortly  after  45 8.^  In  the  writings  of  the 
latter  prophet  the  change  passing  over  the  spirit  of  Hebrew 
prophecy  is  easily  discernible.  The  prophets  of  earlier  days, 
though  claiming  to  recall  their  countrymen  to  their  ancestral 
faith,  had  addressed  them  authoritatively,  and  the  Divine  "  law  " 
to  which  they  challenged  their  hearers'  attention  was  that  of 
which  they  themselves  were  the  mediators  (see  Is.  viii.  16,  cf. 
marg.).  But  Malachi  explicitly  directed  the  people  to  the  Law 
of  Moses  (iv.  4) ;  and  it  is  the  priesthood  that  he  seems  to  have 
regarded  as  the  accredited  agency  for  declaring  the  Divine  will 
(ii.  7),2  though  contending  that  the  existing  members  of  it  were 
unworthy  of  their  office.  And  of  the  importance  assigned  to  the 
priestly  order  in  this  age  by  the  prophets  generally  further  illus- 
tration is  obtained  when  the  prophetic  conceptions  which  now 
prevailed  respecting  (i)  Jehovah's  service  and  requirements,  and 
(2)  the  future  destiny  of  His  people  and  the  outside  world,  are 
compared  with  those  previously  entertained  on  these  subjects. 

I.  The  experiences  which  the  Jewish  community  had  under- 

*  Cf.  p.  472,  note, 

'  At  the  same  time  these  prophets  considered  themselves  to  be  "messengers 
of  Jehovah,"  see  Hag.  i.  13  and  the  name  Malachi  {Mai,  i.  i  marg.). 


RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN        497 

gone  in  captivity,  and  the  situation  in  which  it  was  placed  after  its 
return  from  Babylon  naturally  determined  in  a  great  measure  the 
contents  and  spirit  of  the  prophecies  delivered  shortly  after  the 
close  of  the  Exile.  In  the  first  place,  as  has  been  already  said,  a 
well-organised  ecclesiastical  system  had  now  become  a  necessity. 
To  maintain  the  separateness  and  individuality  of  the  people 
after  the  destruction  of  their  national  polity,  some  visible  witness 
to,  and  expression  of,  the  national  faith  was  urgently  needed. 
In  the  second  place,  the  deepened  consciousness  which  had  been 
acquired  in  the  course  of  the  Captivity  of  the  contrast  between 
Jehovah's  holiness  and  Israel's  sinfulness  inevitably  inclined 
even  the  most  spiritual  minds  to  gi-eater  scrupulousness  in  the 
outward  conduct  of  religion.  Besides  the  natural  reaction 
towards  sacrificial  worship  which  must  have  been  induced  in 
many  by  the  impossibility  of  offering  any  sacrifices  in  Babylon, 
there  must  also  have  prevailed  a  sense  of  the  expediency  of 
erecting  every  possible  safeguard  in  the  future  against  the  dese- 
cration of  Jehovah's  name  which  had  been  so  severely  punished 
in  the  past.  The  different  value  placed  upon  ceremonial  by 
Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  as  compared  with  Amos,  Isaiah, 
and  Jeremiah,  is  largely  explicable  by  the  events  that  had 
occurred  in  the  interval  between  them,  and  the  lessons  which 
those  events  enforced.  The  first  two  of  the  post-exilic  prophets 
named  strove  earnestly  to  promote  the  re-construction  of  the 
Temple,  rebuking  those  who  were  too  busy  with  the  adornment 
of  their  own  dwellings  to  build  the  house  of  God  {Hag.  i.  4), 
rallying  from  despondency  those  who  contrasted  with  the  glories 
of  the  first  Temple  the  meanness  of  the  second  {id.  ii.  3-9),  and 
encouraging  Zerubbabel,  who  was  directing  the  work,  by  assuring 
him  of  Divine  assistance  {Zech.  iv.  6-7).  Similarly  Malachi,  who 
prophesied  after  the  Temple  was  completed,  sought  to  elevate 
the  character  of  its  services,  and  denounced  the  practice  of  pre- 
senting to  Jehovah  blemished  offerings  which  none  would  give 
to  the  Persian  governor  {Mai.  i.  6  foil).  And  the  greater 
respect  demanded  for  the  ceremonies  of  religion  inevitably  led 
to  increased  consideration  being  shown  for  its  ministers,  so  that 
the  same  prophet  represents  the  withholding  of  the  tithes  due 
to  the  priests  to  be  one  of  the  counts  in  Jehovah's  indictment 


498  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

of  His  people,  and  implies  that  such  robbery  was  the  cause  of  the 
blight  upon  their  fields  which  prompt  restitution  would  remove 
(iii.  7-12).  In  thus  insisting  upon  the  duty  of  restoring  the 
Temple,  of  performing  with  reverence  the  worship  conducted  in 
it,  and  of  supporting  cheerfully  its  priesthood,  there  is  no  indi- 
cation that  these  prophets  magnified  ritual  at  the  expense  of 
morality.  They  unsparingly  condemned  theft  and  perjury 
{Mai.  iii.  5,  Zech.  v.  1-4) ;  they  exhorted  to  truth,  justice,  and 
mercy  {Zech.  vii.  9-10,  viii.  16-17);  o"^  of  Zechariah's  numerous 
visions  represented  symbolically  the  removal  of  wickedness  from 
the  land  (v.  5-11);^  and  the  same  prophet  uttered  an  explicit 
warning  against  religious  insincerity  and  self-deception  (viii.  1-7). 
The  importance  attached  by  them  to  the  careful  performance  of 
external  religious  duties  was  not  the  consequence  of  a  relapse 
into  primitive  ideas  of  what  was  acceptable  to  God,  but  was 
owing  in  part  to  practical  considerations,  and  in  part  to  the 
exalted  conception  which  had  come  to  be  entertained  of 
Jehovah's  majesty  and  the  veneration  due  to  Him  (see  especially 
Mai.  i.  6,  14).  They  perceived  that  the  indifference  of  their 
contemporaries  towards  the  Temple  service  did  not  arise  from  a 
sense  of  the  comparative  worthlessness  of  sacrificial  observances 
by  the  side  of  social  integrity,  or  of  their  inadequacy  as  expres- 
sions of  spiritual  realities,  but  sprang  from  baser  motives;  and 
they  doubtless  grasped  the  fact  that  though  ceremonial  was  liable 
to  degenerate  into  formalism,  it  was  nevertheless  capable  of 
serving  both  as  a  vehicle  for  truth  and  a  handmaid  to  devotion. 

Moreover  that  the  recognition  of  the  representative  and 
symbolic  element  in  religion  was  quite  compatible  with  a  highly 
spiritual  view  of  the  relations  between  God  and  individual  men 
is  shown  in  this  age  by  Joel  as  it  was  in  a  previous  age  by  Ezekiel 
(see  p.  445).  On  the  occasion  of  a  grievous  plague  of  locusts  and 
a  severe  drought,  among  the  results  of  which  the  intermission 
of  the  daily  meal -offering  was  regarded  as  one  of  the  most 
distressing,  the  prophet  directed  the  priests  to  sanctify  a  fast, 
call  a  solemn  assembly,  and  make  an  appeal  for  deliverance  to 
the  Almighty  through  the  medium  of  the  formal  ordinances  of 
religion.     But  he  then  proceeded  to  promise  in  God's  name  not 

*  The  ephah  probably  typified  commercial  dishonesty;  cf.  Am.  viii.  5. 


RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN        499 

only  that  the  scourge  would  be  stayed  and  the  scarcity  produced 
by  it  replaced  by  plenty,  but  that  afterwards  there  would  be  a 
diffusion  of  the  Divine  spirit  over  the  whole  community.  "It 
shall  come  to  pass  afterward  that  I  will  pour  out  my  spirit  upon 
all  flesh ;  and  your  sons  and  your  daughters  shall  prophesy,  your 
old  men  shall  dream  dreams,  your  young  men  shall  see  visions ; 
and  also  upon  the  servants  and  upon  the  handmaids  in  those 
days  will  I  pour  out  my  spirit"  (ii.  28-29;  cf.  Is.  xxxii.  15, 
Jer.  xxxi.  33-34,  Ezek.  xi.  19,  xxxvi.  26-27,  2  Is.  lix.  21).  A 
similar  promise  of  spiritual  grace  is  affirmed  in  *^  Zech."  xii.  10, 
though  there  it  has  particular  reference  to  the  spirit  of  penitence, 
whereas  in  Joel  the  allusion  is  rather  to  prophetic  insight  and 
fervour.  In  regard  to  the  last,  however,  it  is  noteworthy  that  in 
the  writings  of  this  time  there  appears  a  consciousness  of  the 
decay  in  Israel  of  true  prophetic  inspiration.  Not  only  is 
disparagement  of  contemporary  prophets  expressed  in  "  Zech.^* 
xiii.  1-6  (where  it  is  declared  that  in  the  blissful  age  that  is 
to  be  the  prophets  will  disown  their  office,  and  if  any  shall 
continue  to  prophesy,  his  own  parents  shall  thrust  him  through), 
but  Malachi  in  foretelhng  the  approach  of  the  day  of  Jehovah 
asserts  that  it  will  be  heralded  by  the  conversion  of  the  sinful 
not  through  the  rise  of  a  fresh  Hne  of  prophets  but  by  the  return 
to  earth  of  one  of  a  bygone  time,  namely  Elijah.  The  announce- 
ment seems  to  betray  a  feeling  that  Israel's  capacity  to  produce 
great  personalities  was  exhausted,  and  that  henceforward  for  the 
continuance  of  prophetic  work  the  spirits  of  the  mighty  dead 
would  have  to  be  revived. 

2.  Amongst  the  prophets  of  this  age  the  diversity  of  view 
regarding  the  Divine  purposes  towards  Israel  and  the  heathen 
world  respectively  which  had  manifested  itself  in  the  prophets 
of  an  earlier  period  became  more  pronounced.  Of  the  three 
prophets  already  named,  Malachi^  though  he  does  not  expressly 
take  into  consideration  the  destiny  of  the  Gentiles,  exhibits  no 
signs  of  the  hostile  spirit  conspicuous  in  Ezekiel  and  others ;  and 
he  even  describes  them  as  comparing  favourably  with  the  Jews 
in  respect  of  the  honour  they  pay  to  Jehovah  {Mai.  i.  11).  In 
Haggai  and  Zechariah  the  Gentiles  appear  as  the  adversaries  of 
Israel;  and  these  prophets  anticipate  for  them  an  overwhelm- 


500  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

ing  overthrow.  The  character  of  the  judgment  is  apocalyptic, 
the  destruction  of  the  guilty  nations  being  attributed  to  the 
direct  interposition  of  Jehovah,  who  causes  them  to  destroy 
each  other  {Hag.  ii.  22),  or  sends  His  ministers  to  discomfit 
them,  and  make  them  the  spoil  of  those  who  served  them 
(Zech.  i.  18-21,  ii.  9).  But  in  the  case  of  these  prophets  some 
allowance  must  be  made  for  the  fact  that  the  bitterness  produced 
by  the  Exile  was  still  acute,  and  in  Zechariah  at  least  (who  like 
2  Is.  ascribes  Jehovah's  resentment  against  the  Gentiles  to  the 
fact  that,  in  acting  as  His  agents  in  chastising  His  people,  they 
had  exceeded  their  mandate  {Zech.  i.  15 ;  cf.  2  Is.  xlvii.  6)),  the 
conversion  of  many  nations  to  Jehovah  is  expressly  contemplated. 
"In  those  days  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  ten  men  shall  take 
hold,  out  of  all  the  languages  of  the  nations,  shall  even  take  hold 
of  the  skirt  of  him  that  is  a  Jew,  saying,  We  will  go  with  you, 
for  we  have  heard  that  God  is  with  you  "  (see  ii.  11,  viii.  20-23). 
In  another  prophecy  which  may  possibly  belong  to  this  date, 
"/j."  xxiv.-xxvii.  (see  p.  469,  but  cf.  p.  487),  an  even  more  generous 
and  catholic  spirit  is  displayed.  The  writer  describes  a  universal 
judgment  upon  the  world  at  large,  though  the  overthrow  of  a 
particular  city  engrosses  most  attention  (xxv.  2,  xxvi.  5);  and 
the  judgment,  which  is  wrought  by  Jehovah  alone,  results  in 
the  deliverance  of  His  people  (xxvi.  20-21).  It  produces  fear 
and  awe  among  the  terrible  of  the  earth,  and  is  followed  by 
a  feast  made  by  Jehovah  on  Mount  Zion  for  all  peoples  There 
He  will  destroy  the  veil  that  is  spread  over  all  nations,  will 
swallow  up  death  for  ever,  and  wipe  away  tears  from  ofif  all  faces. 
The  reproach  of  His  people  will  be  removed,  and  their  scanty 
numbers  enlarged  by  the  resurrection  of  those  Israehtes  who  have 
died  before  their  nation's  redemption.  Moab  alone  of  the 
heathen  world  is  singled  out  by  name  for  destruction  and 
ignominy.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Joel  and  the  writer  or  writers 
of  ^^Zech."  ix.-xiv.,^  whilst  the  future  judgment  predicted  is 
similarly  catastrophic   in    character,   the    animosity   manifested 

*  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  assignment  of  these  writings  to  this 
age  turns  largely  upon  their  sentiment  and  spirit  (see  p.  16) ;  so  that  the  illus- 
trations here  drawn  from  them  only  show  their  contents  to  be  in  harmony  with 
the  character  of  exilic  thought  as  it  is  inferred  from  compositions  of  known 
date,  and  do  not  serve  as  an  independent  proof  of  it. 


RELIGION  AFTER  THE  RETURN        501 

towards  the  Gentiles  is  unqualified.  The  first-mentioned  prophet 
(c.  iii.),  after  affirming  that  Judah  shall  sell  into  slavery  the 
children  of  the  Philistines  and  Phoenicians,  who  had  made 
slaves  of  them,  proceeds  to  declare  that  Jehovah  will  gather 
together  all  nations  and  bring  them  down  to  a  decisive  struggle 
in  the  valley  of  Jehoshaphat,i  where  He  will  sit  to  judge  them, 
and  where  (seemingly)  supernatural  agencies  are  bidden  to 
destroy  them,  whilst  Jehovah  protects  His  chosen.  Israel  will 
then  know  that  He  is  their  God ;  and  thenceforward  Jerusalem 
shall  be  holy,  and  no  strangers  shall  pass  through  her  any  more. 
The  land  will  be  endowed  with  wondrous  productiveness,  being 
fertilised  by  a  fountain  issuing  forth  from  the  Temple,  whilst 
the  neighbouring  countries  of  Egypt  and  Edom  will  become 
desolate  wildernesses  for  the  violence  that  they  have  done  to 
Judah.  In  ^^Zech."  ix.-xiv.  there  are  three  representations  of 
a  contest  between  Jehovah's  Chosen  and  their  adversaries, 
(i.)  In  ix.  13-17  the  conflict  is  between  the  sons  of  Zion  and 
the  sons  of  Greece,  in  which  Jehovah  defends  His  people,  who 
glut  themselves  with  the  blood  of  their  enemies  as  with  wine, 
and  are  then  blessed  with  the  fruit  of  the  field  and  the  vineyard, 
(ii.)  In  ^^Zech."  xii.  i-xiii.  6  (to  which  xiv.  13-14  seems  to 
belong),  Jehovah  affirms  that  He  will  make  Jerusalem  a  cup 
of  reeling  unto  all  the  peoples  round  about,  and  that  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  (Judah  included)  shall  be  gathered  together 
against  it;  that  in  that  day  He  will  make  Jerusalem  a  burden- 
some stone  for  all  who  burden  themselves  with  it,  and  they 
shall  be  sorely  wounded.  He  will  smite  them  with  madness, 
and  will  cause  Judah  to  recognise  its  error,  so  that  its  chieftains 
will  devour  the  assailants  of  Jerusalem,  whose  inhabitants  will 
do  mightily.  In  that  day  a  fountain  shall  be  opened  for  sin 
and  uncleanness;  idols  will  be  abolished;  and  prophets,  who 
are  regarded  as  deceivers,  will  be  destroyed,  (iii.)  In  c.  xiv. 
Jehovah  again  declares  that  He  will  gather  all  nations  to  battle 
against  Jerusalem,  which  is  to  be  taken  and  rifled,  and  half  of  its 

^  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  name  is  to  be  taken  symbolically  ("Jehovah 
judges  "),  or  alludes  to  the  victory  gained  by  Jehoshaphat  over  the  Edomites 
and  their  allies  as  related  in  2  Ch.  xx  (see  ver.  26),  or  describes  a  particular 
locality.  The  name  has  long  been  applied  to  the  valley  separating  Jerusalem 
from  the  mount  of  Olives  (see  Hastings'  Diet.  Bib.  sub  voce). 


502  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

people  are  to  go  into  captivity.  But  then  Jehovah  will  go  forth 
and  fight  against  those  nations:  the  mount  of  Olives  shall  be 
cleft  in  the  midst;  there  shall  go  forth  living  waters  from 
Jerusalem,  eastward  and  westward;  and  Jehovah  shall  be  king 
over  all  the  earth.  Jerusalem  shall  dwell  safely,  but  those  who 
warred  against  it  shall  be  smitten  with  a  plague,  and  the  survivors 
are  to  go  up  thither  to  worship  Jehovah  and  to  keep  the  Feast 
of  Tabernacles.  Such  service  is  not  so  much  the  spontaneous 
adhesion  of  converts  (as  in  Zech.  viii.  22-23)  ^s  the  enforced 
homage  of  conquered  subjects,  for  upon  all  who  go  not  up  to 
Jerusalem  to  worship  there  is  to  be  no  rain.  Finally,  even  the 
very  trappings  of  the  horses  are  to  be  consecrated  to  Jehovah, 
together  with  every  pot  in  Jerusalem  and  Judah,  this  latter  being 
seemingly  due  to  the  number  of  worshippers  who  come  to  take 
part  in  the  sacrifices  of  the  Temple. 

In  striking  contrast  to  the  spirit  of  these  last  passages,  in  which 
the  Jewish  people  and  the  rest  of  the  world  are  placed  in  mutual 
opposition,  is  the  temper  manifested  by  the  book  of  Jonah,^  in 
which  a  malevolent  attitude  towards  the  Gentile  world  is  repre- 
sented as  rebuked  by  Jehovah.  The  lesson  is  conveyed  through 
the  medium  of  an  imaginary  history  or  allegory,  in  which  Jonah, 
the  prophet  who  Uved  in  the  reign  of  Jeroboam  II.  (2  Kg.  xiv.  25) 
is  the  principal  figure.  Jonah,  who  is  probably  to  be  regarded  as 
representative  of  the  Israelite  nation,  is  commissioned  by  Jehovah 
to  warn  the  heathen  city  of  Nineveh  (typifying  the  heathen  world) 
of  its  approaching  destruction ;  but  seeks  to  evade  the  Divine 
command  by  taking  ship  to  Tarshish.  Arrested  in  his  purpose 
by  a  storm,  to  allay  which  the  sailors  throw  him  overboard,  he  is 
saved  from  drowning  by  a  great  fish,  which  first  swallows,  and 
then  disgorges  him  on  to  dr}'  land.^  He  then  proceeds  to  carry 
out  his  mission,  and  declares  to  the  Ninevites  their  imminent 

^  A  late  origin  ior  Jonah  is  favoured  by  the  character  of  the  Hebrew. 

"^  The  incident  of  the  fish  has  been  variously  explained.  Some  scholars, 
elaborating  the  allegory  in  detail,  regard  the  fish  as  representing  the  Babylonian 
empire,  which  first  swallowed  up  (cf.  *^Jer"  li.  34),  and  then  restored,  Israel 
(which  is  personified,  as  explained  above,  by  the  prophet).  The  great  Oriental 
powers  (Egypt,  Assyria,  Babylon,  or  their  successors)  are  similarly  compared 
to  monstrous  dragons  in  "/r."  xxvii.  i,  li.  9,  and  probably  Fs.  Ixxiv.  14,  the 
source  of  the  imagery  being  the  mythological  representation  of  the  elements, 
particularly  the  sea,  under  such  figures  (of.  Job  xxvi.  12,  13,  Fs.  buudx.  9-10, 


RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN        503 

doom ;  whereupon  they  repent,  and  Jehovah  spares  them.  Jonah 
is  so  displeased  at  this  that  he  prays  to  die ;  and  his  displeasure 
is  increased  because  a  gourd  under  which  he  has  rested  is  des- 
troyed by  a  worm  :  whereupon  the  Almighty,  remonstrating,  asks 
why,  if  the  prophet  has  pity  on  the  gourd.  He  Himself  should 
not  have  compassion  on  a  great  city,  whose  very  children  number 
six  score  thousand  souls.  The  story  is  thus  designed  to  emphasise 
the  Divine  interest  in,  and  the  Divine  mercy  towards,  the  heathen, 
and  to  protest  against  the  exclusiveness  and  intolerance  of  the 
Jewish  people,  which  tended  to  make  them  arrogate  to  themselves 
the  sole  claim  upon  God's  humanity. 

In  the  book  of  Daniel,  which  was  probably  written  during  the 
persecution  sustained  by  the  Jews  in  168  b.c.,^  it  is  only  natural 
that  the  fiercer  spirit  of  Judaism  should  recur,  and  that  the 
future  destinies  of  the  chosen  people  and  of  the  Gentile  powers 
should  again  be  impressively  contrasted.  In  a  series  of  visions 
related  to  have  been  witnessed  in  part  by  the  Babylonian 
sovereign  Nebuchadrezzar  and  in  part  by  Daniel,  the  successive 
rise  of  the  Babylonian,  Median,  Persian,  and  Grecian  2  empires 
is  symbolically  represented,  the  last,  in  its  antagonism  to  the 
Jewish  people,  coming  to  a  climax  in  an  individual  ruler 
(Antiochus  Epiphanes),  who  is  sometimes  indicated  figuratively 
(vii.  8,  20),  and  sometimes  more  directly  (viii.  24,  xi.  21),  though 
his  actual  name  is  nowhere  given.  This  ruler  is  described  both 
as  making  war  upon  the  saints  of  the  Most  High  (by  whom  the 
Jews  are  doubtless  intended)  (vii.  21),  and  as  exalting  himself 
against  the  Almighty  and  magnifying  himself  above  all  (xi.  36-37, 

Am.  ix.  3,  and  see  p.  43).  But  it  is  possible  that  the  fish  is  nothing  more 
than  a  deus  ex  machina  introduced  by  the  writer  of  the  story  to  save  the 
prophet  from  the  destruction  he  had  incurred,  and  so  enable  him  to  accomplish 
his  errand  (cf.  the  function  of  the  dolphin  in  the  story  of  Arion,  Hdt.  i.  24). 

^  See  Introd.  pp.  24-6. 

'  The  visions  in  question  are  described  in  c.  ii.,  vii.,  viii.  In  c.  viii.,  where 
it  is  stated  that  the  vision  "belongeth  to  the  time  of  the  end"  (ver.  17),  the 
three  kingdoms  of  Media,  Persia,  and  Greece  are  expressly  said  to  be  indicated 
by  the  symbols  seen  in  the  vision;  and  it  has  consequently  been  concluded 
that  where  four  unnamed  kingdoms  are  symbolised,  as  in  c.  ii.,  vii.,  the  first 
of  these  is  the  Babylonian  (the  predecessor  of  the  Median,  see  v.  30,  31). 
In  ii.  38,  indeed,  one  of  the  symbols  is  explicitly  identified  with  the  king  of 
Babylon.  But  some  scholars  make  the  four  kingdoms  to  be  the  Babylonian, 
the  Medo- Persian,  the  Grecian,  and  the  Roman. 


S04  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORV 

cf.  vii.  25).  Among  the  enormities  which  he  commits  is  the 
interruption  of  the  continual  burnt-offering  and  the  desecration 
of  the  sanctuary  by  the  abomination  that  makcth  desolate  (xi.  31, 
viii,  11-12),  this  last  being  a  heathen  altar  built,  probably  in 
honour  of  Zeus  Olympius  or  Jupiter  Capitolinus,  upon  the 
altar  of  Jehovah  (cf.  xi.  38,  i  Mac.  i.  54,  2  Mac.  vi.  2  foil).  The 
sacrilege  is  accompanied  by  efforts  to  seduce  the  Jews  to  break 
their  covenant  with  Jehovah  (cf.  vii.  25,  viii.  24)  but  those  who 
know  their  God  will  be  strong  and  do  exploits  (xi.  32).  This 
term  of  trial  is  to  continue  for  a  period  which  various  expressions 
combine  to  define  as  about  three  and  a  half  years.  ^  At  its  close 
the  tyrant  is  to  be  destroyed  by  Divine  agency  (viii.  25),  and  his 
kingdom  brought  to  an  end  and  given  to  the  saints  of  the  Most 
High,  who  shall  possess  universal  and  everlasting  dominion,  and 
whom  all  peoples,  nations,  and  languages  shall  serve  (vii.  13-14, 
26-2 7). 2  The  death  of  the  oppressor,  however,  is  not  im- 
mediately succeeded  by  an  age  of  happiness,  but  by  a  time  of 
trouble  ''such  as  never  was  seen  since  there  was  a  nation." 
Deliverance  from  this  is  bestowed  on  such  as  are  deemed  worthy 
of  it,  whilst  the  sifting  process  is  extended  to  many  of  the  dead, 
of  whom  some  awake  to  everlasting  hfe,  and  some  to  shame  and 
everlasting  contempt  (xii.  1-3).  This  sequel  of  endless  glory  for 
the  righteous  is  regarded  as  following  closely  upon  the  tribulation 
suffered  under  Antiochus,  the  writer's  view  of  the  future,  like 
that  of  many  earlier  prophets,  being  foreshortened  as  well  as 
idealised. 

^  The  interval  during  which  the  oppression  of  the  Saints  and  the  profanation 
of  the  sanctuary  is  to  last  is  described  in  vii.  25,  xii.  7  as  a  time^  times ^  and 
a  half,  in  viii.  14  as  two  thousand  three  hundred  evenings  and  mornings^  in 
xii.  1 1  as  a  thousand  two  hundred  and  ninety  days^  in  ix.  27  as  half  a  week  (of 
years).  The  several  numbers  are  not  quite  consistent,  but  they  all  agree  in 
denoting  a  period  of  something  over  three  years,  which  may  be  reckoned  from 
the  desecration  of  the  altar  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  Chislev  (Nov. -Dec) 
168  B.C.  (7  Mac.  i.  54)  to  the  death  of  Antiochus  in  the  middle  of  164, 

'  In  Dan.  vii.  13  the  import  of  the  figure  described  as  one  like  unto  a  son 
of  man  seems  determined  by  the  account  in  ver.  14  of  what  is  bestowed  upon 
him,  which  is  the  same  with  what  in  ver.  18,  22,  27  is  given  to  the  Saints  of 
the  Most  High.  It  seems  probable  therefore  that  the  figure  in  question  is 
intended  to  symbolise  the  people  of  Israel,  who,  as  forming  a  spiritual  kingdom, 
are  contrasted  with  the  empires  of  brute  force  typified  by  the  preceding 
animal  shapes.  That  it  is  represented  as  coming  with  the  clouds  of  heaven 
probably  only  "denotes  exaltation  and  majesty"  (Driver,  Dan.^  p.  105). 


kELIGiON   AFTER  THE  RETURN        50s 

It  will  be  seen  from  what  has  been  said,  how  marked  in  this 
age  was  the  cleavage  in  prophetic  views  respecting  the  future 
relations  of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles  which  first  became  visible 
in  the  time  of  Ezekiel.  On  the  whole,  the  harsher  and  more 
exclusive  attitude  tended  to  predominate  among  the  prophetic 
writers  assigned  to  this  period,  though  not  without  notable  ex- 
ceptions. And  the  more  generous  temper  displayed,  for  instance, 
by  the  writer  of  Jonah  pervades  certain  of  the  psalms  which  may 
with  some  plausibility  be  regarded  as  post-exilic.  The  most 
conspicuous  is  Ps,  Ixxxvii.,  which  breathes  a  spirit  of  com- 
prehensiveness which  is  unsurpassed  anywhere  in  the  O.T. 
In  it  Jehovah  is  represented  as  reckoning  among  those  who 
know  Him  the  very  nations  who  previously  had  been  the  greatest 
enemies  of  His  people,  Egypt  and  Babylon ;  and  as  counting  as 
born  in  Zion,  the  city  He  loves,  the  inhabitants  of  Philistia,  Tyre 
and  Ethiopia.  Other  psalms  of  more  doubtful  date  which 
likewise  share  the  universalism  of  Jeremiah  and  the  Second 
Isaiah  are  xxii.  (ver.  27),  Ixv.  (ver.  2),  Ixvi.  (ver.  4),  Ixvii.,  and 
Ixxxvi.  (ver.  9),  {ci.  Jer.  xvi.  19,  2  Is.  xlv.  22-23,  ^^^'i-  23). 

In  this  age,  the  Messianic  expectations  which  filled  so 
prominent  a  place  in  certain  of  the  prophecies  of  the  8th 
century  but  which  disappeared  during  the  Exile,  were  to  some 
extent  revived.^  They  attached  themselves  to  Zerubbabel,  the 
leader  of  the  first  body  of  returning  Jews,  who  was  a  descendant 
of  the  royal  house  of  David;  and  the  contemporary  prophet 
Zechariah  used  language  which  implied  that  he  saw  in  Zerubbabel 
the  fulfilment  of  earlier  Messianic  predictions.  A  comparison 
of  Zech.  iv.  9  with  vi.  12-13  (see  also  iii.  8)  suggests  that  the 
prophet  identified  Zerubbabel  with  the  righteous  scion  (or  shoot) 
which  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  5,  see  p.  451)  had  foretold  should  be 
raised  up  unto  David;  and  that  great  hopes  were  entertained 
of  him  by  Haggai  likewise  is  manifest  from  the  latter's  declaration 
that  Jehovah  would  take  and  make  him  as  a  signet  (cf  Jer.  xxii. 
24),  for  He  had  chosen  him  {Hag.  ii.  20-23).  Yet  it  is  rather 
difficult  to  believe  that  Zechariah  regarded  the  Messianic  promises 

^  In  ffag.  ii.  7  the  Vulgate  makes  the  prophet  refer  to  the  Messiah  by 
rendering  veniet  Desiderahis  cunctis  gentibus,  but  the  use  of  the  plural  verb 
(Heb.)  and  the  tenor  of  the  context  are  decisive  for  the  trp^nslation  of  the 
R.V.J   cf.   also  the  LXX.   y\l/.i  to.  efcXe/cra,  Trdi-Ta;;'  ru/y  idvdv. 


5o6  OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

of  an  earlier  generation  as  likely  to  be  satisfied  and  exhausted 
by  the  achievements  of  Zerubbabel  himself;  and  it  is  perhaps 
more  probable  that  he  had  in  view  his  future  line,  in  the  course 
of  which  the  destiny  predicted  would  be  consummated.  But 
however  this  may  be,  a  significant  change  was  introduced  into 
the  conception  of  the  Messiah  by  this  prophet,  who  in  his 
predictions  united  with  Zerubbabel  on  terms  of  equahty  the 
high  priest  Joshua.  On  the  occasion  of  certain  oflferings  arriving 
from  Babylon  (possibly  at  a  moment  when  Zerubbabel  chanced 
to  be  absent  from  Jerusalem)  the  prophet  directed  crowns  to 
be  made  and  placed  on  the  head  of  Joshua,  and  bade  those  who 
conveyed  them  say :  "  Thus  speaketh  Jehovah  of  Hosts,  saying, 
Behold  the  man  whose  name  is  the  Scion ;  and  he  shall  grow  up 
out  of  his  place,  and  he  shall  build  the  temple  of  Jehovah  .  .  . 
and  he  shall  bear  the  glory  and  shall  sit  and  rule  upon  his  throne; 
and  there  shall  be  a  priest  upon  {or  by)  his  throne^  and  the 
counsel  of  peace  shall  be  between  them  both"  (Zech.  vi.  12-13). 
The  precise  meaning  of  the  passage  is  obscure;  but  it  seems 
probable  that  Joshua  was  crowned  both  vicariously  for  Zerubbabel 
and  also  on  his  own  account.^  If  so,  the  high  priest  is  for 
the  first  time  placed  by  the  side  of  the  royal  prince  on  an  equal 
footing. 3  In  earlier  days  the  king,  whose  authority  and  functions 
the  Messiah  was  to  inherit,  had  often  performed  priestly  duties, 
and  to  that  extent  had  partaken  of  the  priestly  character.  But 
since  the  suppression  of  the  Jewish  sovereignty,  the  two  offices 
had  become  dissociated;  and  though  a  representative  of  the 
royal  line  was  once  more  possessed  of  authority  at  Jerusalem, 
it  was  no  longer  possible  to  regard  him  as  again  combining  both 
capacities  in  his  single  person.  The  kingly  and  sacerdotal  functions 
of  the  Messiah  had  now  to  be  separately  discharged  by  Zerubbabel 
and  Joshua  respectively.  But  though  dissevered,  they  were  to 
be  exercised  in  unison,  the  two  individuals  invested  with  them 

^  See  marg.  and  cf.  the  LXX.  koX  ((ttcu  6  lepeds  ix  de^iup  a^oO. 

2  Some  scholars  have  held  that  both  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  were  crowned, 
and  that  after  the  vfords /osAt^a  the  son  of  Jehosadak  the  high  priest  should  be 
inserted  and  on  the  head  of  Zerubbabel.  Others  think  that  only  Zerubbabel  was 
crowned,  and  propose  to  substitute  his  name  for  the  name  and  description  of 
Joshua.     It  is  uncertain  whether  there  was  really  more  than  one  crown. 

'  It  is  supposed  by  many  that  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  are  indicated  by  the 
two  olive  trees  described  in  Z(ch.  iv.  1 1-14. 


RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN        507 

being  joined  together  upon  one  throne  in  peace  and  harmony. 
The  dignity  here  extended  to  the  high  priest  seems  reflected 
in  the  expression  the  anointed  one^  the  prince^  occurring  in 
Dan.  ix.  25-26,1  if  that  passage  (the  only  one  in  the  book  which 
alludes  to  the  Messiah  2)  is  rightly  referred  to  Joshua. 

This  age  (it  is  probable)  produced,  in  addition  to  the  prophetic 
writings  just  considered,  two  compositions  of  a  philosophical 
character,  Job  and  Ecciesiastes,  which  discuss  in  various  ways  the 
workings  of  Divine  Providence  and  the  existence  in  the  world  of 
a  moral  order.  The  current  belief  in  early  Israel  had  been  that 
suffering  was  retributive,  and  that  calamity  was  the  consequence 
of  sin.  Such  a  view  maintained  itself  so  long  as  the  idea  of 
individual  responsibility  was  undeveloped;  for  a  man's  misfor- 
tunes could  be  satisfactorily  explained  as  due  to  the  offences  of 
his  forefathers,  if  they  could  not  be  accounted  for  by  his  own. 
But  when  a  sense  of  individual  rights  asserted  itself,  the  sufferings 
of  the  innocent,  in  a  world  ruled  by  a  just  God,  required  another 
explanation.  In  the  poem  of  Job  the  old  solution  of  the  problem 
is  decisively  rejected,  for  Job,  though  subjected  to  severe  trials, 
remains  conscious  of  integrity ;  but  an  alternative  is  not  explicitly 
stated.  The  conclusion,  however,  to  which  the  book  points  is 
that  one  of  the  purposes  which  the  occurrence  of  unmerited  evil 
serves  is  the  manifestation  of  disinterested  goodness.  If  good- 
ness invariably  brought  prosperity  and  wickedness  adversity,  it 
would  be  possible  to  ask  Do  the  righteous  serve  God  for  naught  ? 
(cf.  Job  i.  9),  whereas  the  pressure  of  undeserved  calamity  enables 
the  good  man  to  prove  that  his  virtue  is  not  mercenary  (cf.  Job 
xvii.  6-9).  At  the  same  time  the  claims  of  justice  to  the  indi- 
vidual are  satisfied  by  Job's  ultimate  restoration  to  health  and 
prosperity,  the  compensation  made  to  him  for  his  losses  being 
twofold  (see  xlii.  10).  Such  an  ending,  indeed,  goes  far  to  stultify 
the  solution  (such  as  it  is)  of  the  original  problem,  if  not  to  deny 

^  Between  the  going  forth  of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  to  build 
Jerusalem  {Dan.  ix.  25),  which  Jeremiah  delivered  about  587  {Jer.  xxx.  I-3,  18), 
and  the  Return  under  Zerubbabel  and  Joshua  in  536  there  was  really  an  interval 
of  fifty-one  years ;  but  the  description  of  it  as  seven  weeks  (of  years)  is  close 
enough.  Others,  by  supposing  that  the  anointed  one^  a  prince  indicates  not 
Joshua,  but  Cyrus  who  conquered  Babylon  in  538,  make  the  description  exact. 

*  On  Dan.  vii.  13  see  p.  504,  note. 


5o8  OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 

that  there  is  any  problem  to  be  solved  j  but  it  was  the  easiest,  if 
not  the  only,  way  open  to  the  poet  of  vindicating  the  characters 
both  of  the  Almighty  and  of  Job.  From  the  writer  of  Ecdesiastes 
the  moral  difficulties  which  he  sees  to  be  presented  by  a  universe 
wherein  righteous  men  fare  according  to  the  work  of  the  wicked, 
and  wicked  men  according  to  the  work  of  the  righteous,  and 
where  one  final  event  happens  to  all,  receive  no  speculative  solu- 
tion. But  his  inability  to  discover  one  does  not  lead  him  to 
relinquish  belief  in  God;  and  his  practical  counsel  to  men  to 
enjoy  such  good  things  as  Ufe  affords  is  tempered  by  the  reminder 
to  them  of  a  judgment  to  come.  The  moral  confusion  he  per- 
ceives to  prevail  in  the  world,  and  the  vanity  which  he  observes 
to  attend  on  all  human  effort  do  not  destroy  in  him  the  sense  of 
responsibility  to  the  Creator,  to  fear  Whom  (he  declares)  is  the 
whole  duty  of  man  (xii.  13). 

There  remain  two  subjects  upon  which  reflection,  by  this  age, 
attained  to  certain  beliefs  deserving  of  brief  notice.  These  are 
Angels  and  the  Future  Life. 

I.  In  the  writings  of  Ezekielzxi^.  Zechariah  and  in  the  book  of 
Daniel  subordinate  ministers  (not  always  explicitly  styled  angels) 
not  only  figure  in  the  visions  witnessed  by  the  prophets,  but  are 
represented  as  interpreting  them  afterwards,^  a  feature  which  con- 
trasts strikingly  with  the  directness  with  which  Jehovah  makes  His 
communications  to  the  earlier  prophets  (see,  for  instance,  Am.  vii. 
and  viii.).  It  is  probably  to  be  accounted  for  by  a  fuller  con- 
sciousness of  the  distance  between  the  Almighty  and  His  earthly 
ministers,  which  demanded  an  intermediary  in  the  converse  be- 
tween them.  Three  further  developments  appear  for  the  first 
time  in  Daniel.  In  the  first  place,  two  of  the  angels  referred  to 
in  the  book  possess  personal  appellations,  viz.  Gabriel  and  Michael. 
The  only  other  instance  in  the  O.T.  occurs  in  /  Ch.  xxi.  i,  where 
the  word  Satan  ("the  adversary"),  which  is  used  (with  the  article) 
as  a  title  in  Zech.  iii.  \^Job  i.  6,  is  employed  as  a  proper  name.^ 
In  the  second  place  there  is  some  indication  that  certain  angels 
are  regarded  as  superior  in  rank  to  others,  Michael  being  termed 

*  See  Ezek.  xUii.  6  foil.,  Zech.  i.  9,  Dan.  vii.  16,  viii.  16. 
2  In  the  Apocr}-pha  the  names  of  others  occur,  such  as  Raphael  ( Tob.  v.  4), 
Uriel  {2  Esd.  iv.  i),  Jeremiel  {id.  iv.  36). 


RELIGION   AFTER   THE   RETURN         509 

in  X.  13  one  of  the  chief  princes}  Thirdly,  individual  angels  are 
represented  as  watching  over,  and  directing,  the  fortunes  of 
various  nations,  and  as  being  brought,  like  the  objects  of  their 
care,  into  antagonism  with  each  other  (x.  13,  20).  The  angel 
believed  to  preside  over  the  destinies  of  Israel  is  Michael  (x.  21, 
xii.  i).  To  this  doctrine  of  national  guardian  spirits  allusions 
perhaps  occur  in  "  /jr."  xxiv.  2 1  and  in  the  LXX.  of  Deut.  xxxii.  8. 

2.  Hebrew  speculation  respecting  a  Future  life  had  a  double 
basis  and  followed  a  twofold  line  of  development.  One  line  of 
reflection  started  from  consideration  of  the  community,  and  issued 
in  a  belief  in  the  resurrection  of  individuals,  primarily  in  order  to 
complete  and  perfect  the  destiny  of  the  nation.  The  other  started 
from  the  claims  of  individual  souls,  to  whose  merits  their  earthly 
fortunes  had  not  been  proportionate,  and  for  whom  justice  de- 
manded a  perpetuation  of  life  under  happier  conditions.  The 
first  is  found  chiefly  in  the  prophets,  the  second  principally  in 
certain  psalms  and  in  Job. 

(a)  The  earliest  of  the  writing  prophets  use  the  idea  of  a 
resurrection  figuratively  to  describe  the  revival  of  their  country's 
national  existence  after  a  period  of  captivity  and  exile,  during 
which  their  national  life  was  suspended  (see  Hos,  vi.  1-2,  xiii.  14, 
Ezek,  xxxvii.  12;  cf.  Ps,  Ixxi.  20).  In  exihc  and  post-exilic 
times,  however,  when  the  individual,  and  not  the  community 
only,  attracted  interest,  at  first  the  prolongation  and  subsequently 
the  renewal  of  personal  existence  became  an  object  of  hope, 
though  still  in  connection  with  the  prospective  restoration  of  the 
community.  In  2  Is,  Ixv.  20,  the  writer,  in  describing  the  future 
blessedness  of  Jerusalem,  declares  "There  shall  be  no  more 
thence  an  infant  of  days,  nor  an  old  man  that  hath  not  filled  his 
days ;  for  the  child  shall  die  a  hundred  years  old,  and  the  sinner, 
being  a  hundred  years  old,  shall  be  accursed  " ;  whilst  the  author 
of  *'  /jr."  xxv.  8  goes  beyond  this,  and  asserts  that  after  the  judg- 
ment predicted  has  been  executed,  Jehovah  will  abolish  death 
for  ever.  But  in  "A."  xxvi.  19  the  paucity  and  the  impoverished 
condition  of  the  returned  exiles  of  Israel  lead  the  prophet  to 
anticipate  the  resurrection  to  a  second  life  of  those  members 

^  The  prevalent  belief  in  later  times  was  that  there  were  seven  or  four 
principal  angels  (or  archangels) ;  cf,  Tob.  xii.  15  and  see  Driver,  Dan.,  p.  1^8, 


5IO  OLD   TESTAMENT    HISTORY 

of  the  nation  who  had  perished  before  the  redemption  of 
Jehovah's  people  had  been  accomplished.  He  affirms  a  con- 
fident belief  that  God  will  replenish  the  scanty  numbers  of  the 
restored  community  by  raising  the  dead  and  so  enabling  them 
to  consummate  its  happiness.  Probably  those  whose  resurrection 
is  here  hoped  for  are  the  righteous  dead  only.  But  in  the  book 
of  Daniel  a  more  comprehensive  resurrection  is  predicted.  After 
a  time  of  trouble  such  as  never  was  since  there  was  a  nation, 
Israel  is  to  be  delivered,  every  one  that  shall  be  found  written 
in  God's  book.  "And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust 
of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to 
shame  and  everlasting  contempt"  (xii.  1-2).  Here  it  will  be 
observed  that  the  resurrection  is  not  confined  to  the  righteous, 
but  includes  the  wicked  also.  Nevertheless  it  is  not  universal 
in  its  scope,  but  is  apparently  restricted  to  Israelites,  and  even 
in  the  case  of  these  it  relates  only  to  such  as  have  been  excep. 
tionally  good  or  exceptionally  bad,  the  martyrs  and  apostates  of 
the  times  of  persecution. 

{b)  The  future  life  which  in  the  Psalms  and  elsewhere  it  is 
hoped  will  redress  for  individuals  the  shortcomings  of  the  pre- 
sent life  is  not  expressly  represented  as  a  resurrection  from  the 
dead  but  as  an  immortality  with  God.  The  writers  do  not 
commit  themselves  to  any  belief  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
their  hopes  will  be  realised,  but  entertain  a  vague  though  con- 
fident faith  that  God  cannot  fail  theoL  Thus  the  author  of 
Ps.  Ixxiii.,  after  expressing  the  envy  he  had  felt  at  the  prosperity 
of  the  wicked  as  contrasted  with  his  own  affliction,  asserts  his 
trust  in  God  for  security  when  the  wicked  perish,  in  spite  of  his 
present  weakness  and  despondency  (ver.  24-28).  Similarly  Job, 
though  tempted  to  charge  God  with  injustice  in  plaguing  him 
when  innocent  (x.  3,  15),  yet  feels  assured  that  He  will  eventually 
vindicate  him  (xix.  25).  It  is  not,  indeed,  clear  that  either  the 
Psalmist  or  Job  consciously  extends  his  hopes  beyond  the  grave. 
Job,  though  expressing  his  longing  that  the  Almighty  would  hide 
him  in  Sheol  till  His  wrath  be  past,  and  would  then  call  to  him 
and  once  more  receive  him  into  communion  with  Himself,  cannot 
believe  that  a  man,  once  dead,  will  live  again  (xiv.  7-16);  and 
in  Ps.  xvi    lo-ii  and  xlix.  15  the  subject  of  the  writers'  con- 


RELIGION   AFTER  THE   RETURN        511 

fidence  is  almost  certainly  their  deliverance  from  immediate,  or 
premature,  destruction,  not  their  redemption  from  the  grave  after 
death.  But  the  belief  of  the  Hebrews  respecting  the  relation 
of  God  to  mankind  in  general  and  to  their  own  race  in  particular 
contained  the  germs  of  a  richer  faith  regarding  human  destiny 
than  finds  actual  expression  in  the  O.T.  In  it  were  involved 
the  convictions  (i.)  that  man  was  a  personal  being,  created  by 
the  Deity  and  not  an  emanation  from  Him,  and  that  at  death 
his  individuality  was  preserved  in  the  world  of  Sheol  and  not 
re-absorbed  and  lost  in  the  Divine  source  of  life;  (ii.)  that  God 
entered  into  fellowship  and  communion  with  mankind  and 
especially  with  His  chosen  people,  such  intimacy  conferring 
potential  immortality  (see  Gen.  v.  24,  cf.  S,  Mk.  xii.  26-27). 
Viewed  in  the  light  of  such  pre-suppositions,  the  passages  just 
quoted  are  fuller  of  the  hope  of  eternal  life  than  on  the  surface 
they  appear  to  be,  and  foreshadow  the  ii.^.e  explicit  faith  of  i 
later  time. 


APPENDIX  A 

ANALYSIS  OF  THE   HEXATEUCH 
(See  Carpenter  and  Harford-Battersby,  The  Hexatetuh) 

In  the  following  scheme,  sections  derived  in  the  main  from  one 
of  the  two  sources,  JE  and  P,  are  placed  in  the  appropriate 
column,  small  insertions  from  the  other  source  being  neglected ; 
but  sections  in  which  the  constituent  elements  are  too  intricately 
entangled  to  be  conveniently  separated  are  placed  between  the 
columns. 


GENESIS. 

GENESIS. 

JE 

p^ 

'jE 

P 

ii-  43-iv.  26 
vi.  1-8 

ix.  18-27 
X.  8-19 
xi.  1-9 

xil,  xiii. 

vil,  viii. 

X.  20-32 

xi.  28-32 
xiv. 

I  I-ii.  4a 

V. 

vi.  9-22 
ix.  1-17 
ix.  2S-X.  7 

xi.  10-27 

xxvii. -xlvi. 
xlvl  28-34 
xlix.  1-28 
1. 

xlvi.  6-27 
xlvii.-xlviii. 

xlix.  29-33 

EXODUS. 

JE 

i.  8-vi.  I 

x.,xi. 

p 

ti-7 

vi.  2-vii.  13 
vii.  14-ix.  35 

XV.  xvi. 

xvii. 

XV. 

xii.-xiv. 

xviii.-xxii. 

xxiii. 

xvi 

xxiv.-xxv.  6 

XXV.  7-20 

xvii.-xxiv. 

xxv.-xxxi. 

XXV.  2i-xxvii.45 
xxviii.   lo-xxxiii. 

xxvii.  46- 
xxviii.  9 

xxxiL-xxxiv.  28 

xxxiv.  29-xL 

xxxiv. 

,  XXXV. 

512 


ANALYSIS   OF  THE   HEXATEUCH       513 


LEVITICUS. 

DEUTE 

;R0N0 

MY. 

'jE 

P 

*" 

' 

i.-xxvii. 

i.-xxxii, 

,  47  from  D 

JE 

P 
xxxii.  48-52 

xxxiii.-xxxiv.  6 

xxxiv.  7-9 

NUMBERS. 

JOSHUA. 

'jT 

P     ' 
i.  i-x.  28 

'  JE 
i.,  ii.i 

P 

X.  29-xii. 

iii.-v. 

xiii.,  xiv. 

XV. 

vi.-viii. 

ix. 

xvi. 

xvii.-xix. 

x.-xii. 

xiii.- 

-xvii. 

XX. 

xviii.  I-IO 

xxi.-xxv. 

S 

xviii.  il-xxi.  42 

xxv.6-xxxvl 

xxi.  43-xxii.  8 
xxiii.,  xxiv. 

xxii.  9-34 

^  In  Joshua  the  sections  assigned  to  JE  have  been  expanded  to  a  large 
extent  by  an  editor  writing  in  the  spirit  and  style  of  Deuteronomy.  The  most 
important  of  the  passages  due  to  him  are  i.  3-9,  12-17 ;  x.  28-43 »  ^i-  ^^~ 
xiii.  14;  xiv.  6-15;  xxii.  1-8;  xxiii. 


2    L 


APPENDIX   B 

THE  MOABITE  STONE 

The  Moabite  Stone,  a  slab  3  J  x  2  feet,  was  found  in  1868  amid 
the  ruins  of  the  ancient  Dibon,  and  is  now  in  the  Louvre  at 
Paris.  The  inscription  engraved  on  it  by  Mesha,  the  king  of 
Moab,  about  the  middle  of  the  9th  century  B.C.,  is  written  in  the 
old  Phoenician  alphabet,  and  in  language  closely  resembling 
Hebrew.  A  transliteration  of  it  into  square  Hebrew  characters 
is  given  by  Driver  {Sam.  p.  Ixxxvi.)  and  Bennett  (Hastings,  Did. 
Bib.  iii.  404),  whose  translations  have  been  used  in  the  prepara- 
tion of  the  following  rendering  : — 

"I  am  Mesha,  the  son  of  Chemosh-melech,  king  of  Moab,  the 
Dibonite.  My  father  reigned  over  Moab  thirty  years,  and  I  reigned 
after  my  father.  And  I  made  this  high  place  for  Chemosh  in 
Korhah  (?)...  of  salvation,  because  he  saved  me  from  all  the  kings, 
and  because  he  made  to  see  my  desire  upon  all  that  hated  me.^  Omri 
was  king  of  Israel,  and  he  afflicted  ^  Moab  many  days  because 
Chemosh  was  angry  with  ^  his  land.  And  his  son  succeeded  him,  and 
he  too  said,  I  will  afflict  Moab.  In  my  days  he  said  (thus),  but  I  saw 
my  desire  upon  him  and  his  house,  and  Israel  perished  everlastingly. 
And  Omri  possessed^  the  land  of  Medeba,  and  dwelt  in  it  during  his 
own  days  and  half  the  days  of  his  son,  even  forty  years,  but  Chemosh 
(restored  it)  in  my  days.  And  I  built  Baal-meon,  and  I  made  in  it  the 
reservoir  (?),  and  I  built  Kiriathaim.  And  the  men  of  Gad  had  dwelt 
in  the  land  of  Ataroth  from  of  old.  And  the  king  of  Israel  built  for 
himself  Ataroth.  And  I  fought  against  the  city,  and  took  it,  and  slew 
all  the  (people)  of  the  city,^  a  gazing-stock(?)^  for  Chemosh  and  for 
Moab.    And  I  carried  away  captive  from  thence  the  altar-hearth '  of 

1  Cf.  Ps.  lix.  10. 

*  Cf.  Gen.  XV.  13,  Num.  xxiv.  24. 
»  Cf.  2  Kg.  xvii.  18. 

*  Cf.  Jud.  xi.  21,  Num.  xxi.  35. 
«*  Cf.  Jud.  ix.  45. 

«  Cf.  Nah.  iii.  6. 
'  Cf.  Ezek.  xliii.  15. 

5M 


THE   MOABITE   STONE  515 

Dodoh,  and  I  dragged  it  before  Chemosh  in  Kiriath,  and  I  made  the 
men  of  Sharon  (?)  and  the  men  of  Moharath  (?)  to  dwell  in  it.  And 
Chemosh  said  to  me,  Go  and  take^  Nebo  against  Israel,  and  I  went 
by  night  and  fought  against  it  from  the  break  of  dawn  until  noon,  and 
I  took  it,  and  I  slew  all  of  it,  7,000  men  .  .  .  and  women  .  .  .  and 
damsels,  for  I  had  devoted  it  to  Ashtar  Chemosh.^  And  I  took  from 
thence  the  (ves)sels  of  Jehovah,  and  I  dragged  them  before  Chemosh. 
And  the  king  of  Israel  built  Jahaz,  and  dwelt  in  it  whilst  he  fought 
against  me,  and  Chemosh  drove  him  out  before  me.^  And  I  took  of 
Moab  200  men,  all  its  heads,  and  I  led  them  against  Jahaz,  and  took 
it,  to  add  it  to  Dibon.  I  built  Korhah(?),  the  wall  of  the  forests  and 
the  wall  of  the  Ophel,'*  and  I  built  its  gates,  and  I  built  its  towers, 
and  I  built  the  king's  house,  and  I  made  sluice-gates  for  the  reser- 
voirs (?)  (of  water)  in  the  midst  of  the  city.  And  there  was  no  cistern 
in  the  midst  of  the  city,  in  Korhah  (?).  And  I  said  to  all  the  people, 
Make  for  you  every  man  a  cistern  in  his  house.  And  I  digged  the 
ditch  (?)  for  Korhah  (?)  by  means  of  the  prisoners  of  Israel.  I  built 
Aroer,  and  I  made  the  high-way  at  the  Arnon.  I  built  Beth-bamoth, 
for  it  was  destroyed.  I  built  Bezer,  for  it  was  a  heap  of  ruins  .  .  . 
Dibon  50,  for  all  Dibon  was  obedient,  and  I  reigned  ...  100  in  the 
cities  which  I  added  to  the  land.  And  I  built  Medeba  and  Beth- 
diblathaim  and  Beth-baal-meon ;  and  I  carried  there  the  sheep- 
masters  (?)*  of  the  land.  And  as  for  Horonaim,  there  dwelt  in  it .  .  . 
said  .  .  .  Chemosh  said  to  me.  Go  down,^  fight  against  Horonaim  ; 
and  I  went  down  .  .  .  and  Chemosh  (restored)  it  in  my  days.  And  I 
went  up  (?)  from  thence  .  .  ." 

^  Of.  7  Sam.  xxiii.  2. 

*  Cf.  Mic.  iv.  12,/osA.  viii.  26. 
»  Cf.  /osh.  xxiv.  18. 

*  Cf.  2  Ch.  xxvii.  3. 
»  Cf.  2  Kg.  iii.  4. 

*  Cf.  I  Sam.  xxiii,  4. 


1 


APPENDIX  C 

WEIGHTS  AND  MEASURES 


(i)  Weights  (for  commodities). 


lo  gerahs 

2  bekas 

60  shekels 

60  manehs 


=  I  beka. 
=  I  skekelJ 
=  I  maneh. 
=  I  talent^ 


(ii)  Weights  (for  gold  and  silver). 


10  gerahs 

2  bekas 
50  shekels 
60  manehs 

6  cabs 

3  seahs  ) 
10  omers  ) 

5  ephahs 
10  ephahs 

12  logs 

6  bins 
10  baths 


(iii)  Dry  Measures. 


(iv)  Liquid  Measures. 


I  beka. 
I  shekel 
I  maneh. 
I  talent* 

I  seah. 
I  ephah. 

I  lethech. 
I  homer.* 

I  hin. 
I  bath 
I  cor.* 


*  A  shekel  weighed  about  224  grains. 

*  This  talent  weighed  a  little  over  115  lbs.,  or  rather  more  than  8  stone. 

'  That  the  talent  used  for  weighing  silver  contained  only  3,000  (not  3,600) 
shekels  appears  from  the  calculation  in  £x.  xxxviii.  25-26.  The  silver  shekel 
weighed  224  grains,  but  the  gold  shekel  is  said  to  have  weighed  252  grains. 
According  to  this  reckoning  the  silver  talent  weighed  about  96_lbs.  avoirdu- 
pois, and  the  gold  talent  about  108  lbs.  (Hastings,  Diet.  Bib. ^  iii.  419). 

*  A  homer  and  a  c<7r  were  equal  in  capacity,  and  contained  about  83  gallons, 
or  ID  bushels,  3  gallons  ( Cambridge  Comp.  to  Bib. ,  p.  479). 

S16 


WEIGHTS   AND   MEASURES  517 

(v)  Measures  of  Length. 

4  fingers =1  hand  breadth. 

3  hand  breadths         .        .        .     =  i  span. 
2  spans =1  cubit.^ 

The  length  of  the  cubit  varied  at  different  periods,  for  mention  is  made  in 
s  Ch.  iii.  3  of  a  cubit  "after  the  first  measure,"  whilst  Ezek.  xl.  5  refers  to  one 
which  measured  a  cubit  and  a  hand  breadth.  The  precise  length  of  the  earlier 
cubit  is  supposed  to  have  been  rather  more  than  17^  inches. 


APPENDIX  D 

NAMES  AND  ORDER  OF  THE  MONTHS 

In  the  course  of  Hebrew  history  two  different  seasons  were 
successively  regarded  as  the  beginning  of  the  year,  and  two 
different  series  of  names  were  successively  employed  to  denote 
the  months.  In  early  times  the  year  was  held  to  begin  in  the 
autumn  (see  Exodus  xxiii.  i6,  xxxiv.  22),  and  the  first  month  was 
called  Ethanim^  the  names  of  only  three  others  being  known, 
namely,  Bui  (the  second),  Abib  (the  seventh),  and  Ziv  (the 
eighth).  But  subsequently  the  year  commenced  in  the  springy 
and  the  seventh  and  first  months  became  respectively  the  first 
and  seventh.^  New  appellations  were  likewise  applied  to  all 
(though  they  were  frequently  designated  by  their  order  only),  the 
full  list  being  as  follows  : — 


Early  Names, 

1.  Ethanim 

2.  Bui       . 


7.  Abib 

8.  Ziv 


Late  Names, 

7.  Tishri  . 

8.  Markheshvan 

9.  Chislev 

10.  Tebeth 

11.  Shebat 

12.  Adar 

1.  Nisan 

2.  lyyar 

3.  Sivan 

4.  Taramuz 

5.  Ab 

6.  Elul 


Time  of  Year, 
Sept.— Oct. 
Oct.  —Nov. 
Nov.  — Dec. 
Dec.  — ^Jan. 
Jan.  —Feb. 
Feb.  —Mar. 
Mar.  — Ap. 
Ap.   — May 
May  — ^June 
Tune  —July 
July  —Aug. 
Aug.  — Sept. 


^  Military  campaigns,  which  would  naturally  be  begun  in  the  spring,  are 
described  as  taking  place  at  the  returtt  of  the  year  {2  Sam.  xi.  I,  /  ICg.  xx.  22); 
and  the  ninth  month  fell  in  the  cold  season  Qer,  xxxvi.  22). 


518 


INDEX 


Aaron,  ioi,  103,  104,  105,  113,  116, 

119,  122,  123,  124 
Ab,  518 
Abdon,  207 
Abel,  54-6 

Abel-beth-maacah,  270,  328 
Abel-cheramim,  206 
Abel-meholah,  336,  352 
ABEL-MAiM,see  Abel-beth-maacah 
Abiathar,  230,  239,  240,  258,  265, 

269,  271,  283,  294-5 
Abib,  518 
Abiezer,  200 
Abigail  (i),  223 
(2),  231 
Abihu,  124 
Abijah  (i),  217 
(2),  309 
Abijam,  Abijah,  325-6 
Abimelech  (i),  77,  7S 
(2),  203-4 
Abinadab  (i),  212 
(2),  236 

ABIRAM,   122 

Abishag,  271,  294 

Abishai,  232,  243,  251,  253,  254, 

260,  261,  265,  ^66,  268,  270 
Abner,  225,  241-3 
Abram,  Abraham,  75-8 

,,       his   willingness    to    sacrifice 
Isaac,  77-8,  93 
Absalom,  263-8 

Abomination  that  maketh  desolate,  504 
AccAD,  73 
Acco,  183 
Achan,  174 
Achish,  229,  233 
Achor,  174 
Achsah,  175 
achshaph, 179 
Achzib,  183 
Adah,  54 
Adam,  49 


Adar  (god),  85,  403 

(month),  518 
Admah,  70,  76 
Adon,  84,  91 
Adoni-bezek,  174 
Adonijah,  271-2,  294 
Adoniram,  258,  306,  309,  313 
Adoni-zedek,  174 
Adoram,  see  Adoniram 
Adriel,  226 
Adullam,  229 
Adultery  prohibited,  137,  155 
Adummim,  The  ascent  of,  181 
Agag,  222,  290 
Ahab,  330-8 
Ahashverosh,  469 
Ahava,  474 
Ahaz,  359-62 
Ahaziah  (i),  338-9 

(2),  344-5 
Aiiimelech,  229 
Ahijah  (i),  219,  283 

(2),  309,  314,  323,  400 

(3),  306 
Ahikam,  382 
Ahimaaz,  269 
Ahinoam,  231 
Ahishar,  306 
Ahitophel,  258,  265-7 
Ahlab,  183 
Aholiab,  142 
Ai,  173-6 
Aijalon,  The  valley  of,    182,    197, 

219,  325 
Aijalon  (i),  184,  185,  314,  324,  360 

(2),  207 
Alexander,  487 
Altars,  61,  140-2 

Alush,  III  [220,222,255 

Amalek,  Amalekites,  71,113,  200, 
Am  ASA,  186,  268,  269,  270 
Amaziah  (i),  352-3 
(2),  3SS 


519 


1 


520 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Ammon,  Ammonites,  74,  77,  205-7, 
215,  252-4,  348,  356,  383,  385,  387 
Amnon,  262-3 
Amon,  375 

Amen-hotep,  99,  168 
Amoritks,  69,  70,  125-7,  169,  177 
Amos,  354-5,  414,  418,  422-32 
Amos,  2i> 
Amram,  ioi 
Amraphel,  76,  83 
Anakim,  73,  119 
Anamim,  67 
Anath, 85 

Anathoth,  85,  376,  385 
Angels,  94,  508-9 
Animal  sacrifices,  144-7 
Anshan,  393 

Antiochus  I.-IV.,  488-90 
Anu,  43,  85 
Aphek   (various   places),    210,    234, 

333,  351 
Aphik,  183 

Apocalyptic  prophecies,  428,  451 
Apologue,  Jotham's,  203-4 
Apsu,  43 

Arabah,  70  [355 

Arabia,  Arabians,  299,  331,  343, 
Arab,  120,  324 
Aram,  72,  73,  79,  196,  253  (see  also 

Syria) 
Araunah,  250 
Archites,  266 
Arioch,  76,  83 
Ark,  Noah's,  57 

,,     of  the  Covenant,  115,  139,  141, 
158,  211-2,  248,  265,  280-1 
Arka,  68 
Arnon,  69,  125 
Aroer,  181,  206 
Arpachshad,  71 
Arses,  486 
Ariahshashta,  469 
Artaxerxes  I.,  473 
II.,  486 
„        HI..  486 
Arvad,  68,  335,  370 
Asa,  326-8 

ASENATH,  80 

AsHDOD,  67,  211,  355,  367,  370 

ASHER,    ASHKRITES,    79,     183,     185, 

241 

Asherah,  Asherim,  88,  138,  141,  327, 
332,  336,  365.  373,  377,  398 

ASHKELON,  67,  17s,  209,  369-70 


Ashkenaz,  65 

Ashtar-chemosh,  86,  139,  515 
ashtoreth,  85,  160,  308,  4oo 
ashurites,  241 
AssHUR  (god),  85,  86 
„       (locality),  71,  73 

ASSHUR-BANI-PAL,  363,  373*4 
ASSHUR-DAN-IL,  354 
ASSHUR-ETIL-ILANI,  379 
ASSHUR-NIRARI,  354 
ASSHUR-NASIR-PAL,  33O 

ASSYRIA,  Assyrians,  316,  330,  334, 
347,  354,  357-64,  367-74,  378-80 

Assyrian  Age,  Religion  in  the,  403-5, 
422-36 

ASTYAGES,  393 

Asylum  for  rash  homicides,  152 
Ataroth,  181,  338,  514 
Atonement,  Day  of,  149-50 
Atonement   for   undetected    murder, 

153 
Atoning  sacrifices,  146 
Athaliah,  335,  348-9 
Ayephim,  266 
Azariah  (i),  306 

(2),  327 

(3),  see  UzziAH 
Azazel,  149 

Baal,  Baalim,  84,  91,  278-9,  359 

Baalah,  85 

Baalah,  see  Kiriath  Jearim 

Baal-berith,  203-4 

Baale-judah,  see  Kiriath  Jba&im 

Baal-hazor,  263 

Baalis,  387-8 

Baal-meon,  181,  514 

Baal-perazim,  246 

Baal-peor,  128 

Baal-zebub,  339 

Baal-zephon,  109 

Baal  of  Zidon,  315,  330,  332,  335 

Baasha,  326-8 

Babel,  73 

„       Tower  of,  63-4 
Babylonia,    Babylonians,    73-4, 

167-8,  317,  380-93 
Babylonian   Age,    Religion    in    the, 

436-52 
Babylonian  religion,  85 
Bagoses,  486 
Balaam,  127-9 
Balak,  127-28 
Barak,  198-9 


INDEX 


521 


Baruch,  383 

Barzillai,  267,  270 

Bash  AN,  69,  205,  348 

Bath^  516 

Bathsheba,  262,  271,  294 

Bathshua,  see  Bathsheba 

Bealiah,  279 

Beer-lahai-roi,  77,  78 

Beeroth,  169,  177,  221 

Beersheba,  75,  181,  217,  336 

Beka,  516 

Bel,  59,  85 

Bela,  76 

Belshazzar,  26,  393 

Benaiah,  260,  271,  295,  306 

Benhadad,  328,  333-4,  342 

Benjamin,  79,  80,  182 

Benoni,  80 

Beracah,  Valley  of,  332 

Berothai,  252 

Besor,  239 

Bestiality  punished,  156 

Beth-anath,  86,  185 

Bethel,  75,  76,  79,  2>'^,  92,  176,  179, 

217,  281,  314,  322-3,  325,  378 
Beth-horon,  177,  182,  297,  324 
Bethlehem,  85,  223,  228,  246,  281 
Bethmerhak,  265 
Bethrehob,  see  Rehob. 
Bkthshan,  166-7,  185,  235-6 
Beth-shemesh,  86, 185, 212, 352, 360 
Bethuel,  74 
Bezalel,  142 
Bezek  (i),  174 
(2),  216 
Bezkr,  188 

BiDKAR,  337 

Bilhah,  79 
Birthright,  78,  156 
BiSHLAM,  477 
BiTHRON,  242 

Blessing  (of  Isaac),  82 

„       (of  Jacob),  82,  97,  292 

,,        (of  Moses),  131 
Blood,  Drinking  of,  145,  219 
Blood-feud,  159 
Boazy  302 
BOAZ,  186,  223 
Brazen  Serpent,  124,  365 
Brook  of  the  Arabah,  353 

„        Egypt,  181 
Bui,  518 

Burnt-offerings,  146 
Byblus,  347  (see  also  Gebal) 

2  L  2 


Cab,  5^6 

Cabul,  305 

Cain,  54-6 

Caleb,  119,  174,  175 

Calf,  an  object  of  worship,  II4,  160, 
322,  347,  351,  398,  403 

Cambyses,  469 

Canaan,  68,  165-70 

„         Conquest  of,  170-89 

Canaanites,  69,   70,   73,    169-70, 

179,  180, 198,  277-8 

,,  Religion  of  the,  84-90 

Caphtorim,  67 

Carchemish,  68,  334,  383 

Carmel,  222,  231 

Mount,  69,  182,  336,  398 

Carians,  349 

Casiphia,  474 

Casluhim,  67 

Chaldeans,    26    (see   also    Baby- 
lonians) 

Chebar,  384 

Chedorlaomer,  76,  83 

Cheniarim,  yj"] 

Chemosh,  86,  207,  278,  308,   341, 

5M-5 
Chephirah,  169,  177 
Cherel kites,  239,  251,  259 
Cherith,  336 
Cherubi77i,  49-50,  139,  302 
Children,     their     relation     to     their 

parents,  154,  159,  443 
Children  of  Solomon^ s  servants,  466 
Chimham,  270 
Chinnereth,  Lake  of,  69 
C his  lev,  518 
Chiun,  403 

Christ  and  O.T.  criticism,  32 
Chronicles,  lo-il,  15,  16 
Chronology  of  the  Patriarchal  Age,  Sj 
, ,  , ,   the  Mosaic  Age,  98 

II  II  J^i'Sy  195-6 

„    Kings,  317-21 
Circumcision,  77,  93,  103,  17 1-2 
Clean  and  unclean  animals,  93,  146 
Cloud,  Pillar  of,  no,  140 
CoNiAH,  see  Jehoiachin 
Conquest  of  Canaan,  1 70-89 
Consecrate,  To,  143 
Cor,  516 

Corpses,  Pollution  conveyed  by,  151-2 
Covenant  between  God  and  man,  61, 

76,  115,  427,  445,  483 
Covetousness  prohibited,  138,  1 57 


522 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Creation,  The,  39-4^ 

,,  Biblical  narrative  compared 

with  modern  science,  41 
„         Theological  truths  implied 
in  the  narrative,  44-8 
Cubit,  517 
CusH,  42-3,  €^,  67,  450 

CUSHAN-RISHATHAIM,   I96 
CUTHAH,  363,  368 

Cyaxares,  379,  3S0 
Cyrus,  393,  465 

Dagon,  209,  21 1-2,  236 
Damascus,  69,  253,  296,  315,  328, 
335,  342,  351,  353.  359,  362,  419 
Dan,  Danites,  79,  182-4 
„     (town),  76,  183,  184,  281,  322, 
328 
Daniel,  24-7,  503-4 
David,  his  relations  with  Saul,  223-33 

,,      king  of  J udah,  240-3 

,,      king  of  all  Israel,  244-72 

,,      his  wars,  245-55 

, ,      his  territory,  family,  and  court, 
256-62 

,,      his  domestic  troubles,  262-72 

,,      his  character,  272-6 
Darius  I.,  469-70 

„     II.,  III.,  486 
Darius  the  Mede,  26,  394 
Dathan,  122 

Daughters,  Inheritance  of,  156 
Day  of  Jehoz'ah,  403,  414,  427,  499 
Dead,  Belief  respecting  the,  89-90, 

94-5,  159,  509-11 
Dead  Sea,  69 
Debir,  175,  178 
Deborah,  198-200,  289-90 
Decalogue,  The,  137-8 
Dedan,  67 

Dedication  of  the  First  Temple,  304 
,,  ,,  Second  Temple,  470 

Deioces,  379 
Delilah,  209 
Deluge,  see  Flood 
Deportation,  362,  363,  370 
Deuteronomy,  6,    7,    131,    141,    1 43, 

149,  150,  152-3.  155,  157,  376-8, 

437-41 
Devotion,    Practice  of,    138-9,    173 

290,  515 
Dinah,  79-80 
Divination,  81,  89,  282 
Dishonest  measures  forbidden,  154 


Divorce,  155 

DODANIM,  66 

Doeg,  230 
dophkah,  iii 
Dor,  183 

DOTHAN,  80,  235,  342 

Dreams,  79,  80,  89,  255,  309 
Duration  of  Life,    Exceptional,  55, 
82,98 

Ea,  43,  85 

Ebal,  178,  179,  281 

Ebed-melech,  386 

Ebenezer,  210,  217 

Ecclesiastes,  20,  311,  508 

Ed,  Altar  of,  188-9 

Eden,  42 

Edom,  Edomitks,  74,  79, 82,87, 123, 
128,  220,  254,  296,  314,  315,  331, 
340,  343,  351,  352,  360,  385,  386 

Eglon  (king),  196-7 
„       (town),  178 

Egypt,  Egyptians,  67,  75,  80-1, 
98-106,  121,  168-9,  297,  308,  316, 
317,  324,  342,  358,  367,  369,  380, 
382,  38s,  387,  388 

Ehud,  197 

Ekron,  67,  175,  211,  225,  369-70 

El,  84 

Elah,  329 

Elam,  Elamites,  71,  76,83,167,368 

Elath,  124,  183,  255-6,  355,  360 

Eldad,  118 

Eleazar  (i),  124,  142,  188,  283 

(2),  212 

(3),  260 
Elhanan,  225,  251 
Eli,  210-11 

Eliakim,  see  Jehoiakim 
Eliashib,  478,  484 
Eliezer,  102,  113 
Elihoreph,  306 
Elijah,  35,  335-9,  344,  401,  499 
Elim,  III 

Elisha,  35,  336,  339,  341-3,  351-a 
Elishah,  65 
Elisheba,  124 
Ellasar,  73,  76 
Elohim,  46,  86 
Elon,  207 
El-Shaddai,  92,  104 
Eltekeh,  370 
Elparan,  76 
Elul,  518 


INDEX 


523 


Elyon,  91 
Emim,  74,  126 
Endor,  185,  235 

Witch  of,  235 
Engedi,  76,  232,  332 
En-hakkore,  209 
En-mishpat,  76  (see  also  Kadksh) 
Enoch,  54,  55,  56 
Enosh,  54 

En-rogel,  267,  271,  272,  301 
Ephah,  516 

Ephes-dammim,  225  [402 

Ephod,  143,  144,  184,  202,  230,  282, 
Ephraim,  Ephraimites,   80,   182, 

185,  203,  207 
Ephraim,  Mount,  178 

,,         The  Forest  of,  186, 268 
Ephron,  325 
Erech,  73,  368 
Esar-haddon,  363,  373 
Esau,  78,  79 
Esdraelon,  Plain  of,   165,   170,  182, 

185,  198,  234 

ESHBAAL,  241-3,  279 
ESHTAOL,  182,  209 

Espial  of  Canaan,  119-20 
Esther,  473 
Esther,  11 
Etham,  108 
Ethbaal,  330,  336 
Ethiopia,  369  (see  also  Cush) 
Eve,  49 

evil-merodach,  39o,  393 
Exile,  The,  386-94 

„  Religion  in  the  Age  of, 

452-64 
Exodus,  The,  98-110,  162 
Exodus,  see  Hexateuch 

EZEKIEL,  384,  416,  418,  419,  441-52, 

453-64 

Ezekiel,  24 

Ezion-geber,  124-5,  255-6,  297,  339 

Ezra,  474-8,  483,  486 

Ezra,  lo-ii,  15 

Fall,  The,  48-53 

t.  The  historical  and  theo- 
logical value  of  the 
narrative,  50-2 

False  swearing  prohibited,  139 

False  witness  prohibited,  137,  153-4 

Familiar  spirit,  89,  235,  378 

Fasting,  149,  285 

Finger,  517 


Fire,  Jehovah  manifested  in,  103, 104, 

.158,  336 
Firmament,  The,  40 
First-born,  The  sacrifice  of  the,  90, 
93,  95-6,  341 
,,  The  right  of  the,  156 

First-fruits,  Feast  of,  148 
Flood,  The,  57-62 

„  The  historical  and  theo- 

logical   value    of   the 
narrative,  60 
Forest  of  Lebanon,  House  of,  304 
Forty  years,  I2I,  1 95-6,  416,  467 
Future  life.  The,  159,  509-11 

Gaal,  204 

Gad,  Gadites,  79,  127,  171,   181, 

188,  220,  514 
Gad  (prophet),  250,  292 
Galilee,  185,  361,  434 
Gashmu,  481 

Gates  of  Jerusalem,  The,  480 
Gath,  67,  211,  225,  229,  232,  251, 

295.  350,  355 
Gath-hepher,  182,  354 
Gaza,  67,  175,  209,  296,  324,  366, 

367,  487 
Gebal,  168,  370  (see  also  Byblus) 
Gedaliah,  387-8 
Gederoth,  360 
Gehazi,  341-3 
Genealogies,  64-6,  7 1 ,  74 
Genesis,  see  Hexateuch 

„       The  historical  value  of,  12, 

38-9  (see  also  Creation, 

Fall,  Flood) 
Genubath,  296 
Gera,  516 
Gerar,  67,  77,  78 
Gerizim,  178,  179,  203,  485 
Gershom,  102,  103,  113 
Geshur,  241,  263 
Gezer,  168,  178,  184,  233,  297 
Gibbethon,  326,  329 
Gibborim,  260 

Gibeah,  Geba,  191-2,  218,  287,  328 
,,       of  Phinehas,  188-9 

GiBEON,    169,    177,   246,   258,  281-2, 

309,  324,  388,  397 

GiBEONITES,   177,   184,  220-1,  245 

Gideon,  200-3,  283 
Gihon,  272,  301,  370 

GiLEAD,   GiLEADITES,  69,  186,  20$, 

207,  218,  348,  353,  358,  361 


524 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


GiLBOA,  20I,  235 

GiLGAL  (l),  171,  172,  217,  281 

(2),  339 

GiRGASHITES,  70 
GOBRYAS,  26,  393 

Gog,  450 
Goiim,  76,  180 
Golan,  i88 
Goliath,  225,  251 
GoMKR,  65,  450 
Gomorrah,  70,  'jS,  77 
Gopher-wood,  57 
Goshen,  75,  81 
GozAN,  363 
Guilt  oflferings,  147 

Habakkuk,  441  folL 
Habakkuk,  29 
Habor,  363 
Hachilah,  232 
Hadad,  254,  296 
M        (god),  87 
Hadadezer,  Hadarezer,  252,  253 
Hadoram,  255 
Hagar,  76,  77 
Haggai,  469,  496-502 
Haggai,  30 
Hagrites,  220 
Halah,  363 
Ham,  62,  64 

Hamitic  peoples,  64,  66-70 
Haman,  473 
Hamath,    Hamathites,   68,  255, 

334-S.  353,  364 
Hamor,  79 
Hanani  (i),  328 

(2),  479,  483 
Hananiah,  483 
Hand  breadth^  517 
Hanun,  252 
Hapharaim,  324 
Haran,  73,  75,  78 
Harod,  201 
Harosheth,  198 
Harvest^  Feast  of^  148 
Havilah,  66 

Havvoth  Jair,  205  [350 

Hazael,   336,   342-3,    344,   347-8, 
Hazeroth,  118 
Hazezon  Tamar,  76 
Hazor,  179,  185,  198,  297 
Heave  thigh^  151 
Heber,  199 
Hebrew y  Meaning  of,  71 


Hebron,  75,  76,  80,  175,  178,  188, 
240,  243,  244,  24s,  264,  281-2 

Helam,  253 

Helbah,  183 

Helkath  Hazzurim^  242 

Hermon,  68,  347 

Heshbon,  126-7,  181 

Heth,  see  Hittites 

Hexatetuh,  The,  6-8 

, ,  Analysis  of  the,  5 1 2-3 

Hezekiah,  365-73 

Hezion,  296,  328 

HiEL,  173,  332 

High  places,  323,  327,  365,  373,  377, 
401,  404,  437,  514 

Bill  of  the  foreskins y  171 

Hills  as  sanctuaries,   88  (see  High 
Places) 

HiLKlAH,  376 

Hin,  516 

Hinnorn,  Valley  of  300-I,  377 

Hiram,  255,  299,  305 

Hiram  Abi,  186,  301 

Hittites,  68-9,  99,  169,  334,  342-3 

HiVITES,   70,  169 
Hobab,  SeejETHRO 

Hobah,  76 
Homer,  516 
Homicide,  152 
HoPHNi,  2S3 
HoPHRA,  38S-9,  393 
HoR,  Mount  (i),  123,  124 

(2),  130 
Horeb,  see  Sinai 
HoRiTEs,  74 
Hormah,  120,  175,  182 
Horonaim,  338,  515 
HosEA,  354-5,  417,  422-32 
Ho  sea,  27 
Hoshea,  362-3 
Host,  The,  259 
Host  of  heaven,  Worship  of  the,  377, 

403,  437 
Hosts,  Jehovah  of  279 

HULDAH,  376 

Human  sacrifices,  90,  93,  95-6,  206, 

285,  341 
HUR,  113 

HUSHAI,  258,  266,  267 

Hydromancy,  81 
Hyksos,  75,  98 

i  am  that  i  am,  io4 
Ibleam,  185 


\ 


INDEX 


525 


Ibzan,  207 

IDDO,  474 
IjON,  183,  328 

Image  worship  prohibited,  137,  160, 
423-4,  439,  454-5 

Immanuely  361,  433-4,  43^ 

Ingatherings  Feast  of,  148,  285,  322 

Inheritance,  156 

Intermarriage  with  foreigners  pro- 
hibited, 138,  475-6,  484-S 

Ira,  259,  284 

Isaac,  77,  78 

Isaiah,  356,  360-1,  365,  367-72, 
414-15,  417,  418,  422-36 

Isaiah,  21-3 

2  Isaiah,  21-2,  392,  419,  453-64 

ISHBI-BKNOB,  25 1 

IsHBOSHKTH,  see  Eshbaal 

ISHMAEL  (l),  ISHMAELITES,   74,   77, 
80,  200 

(2)  387,  388 
ISHTAR,  85 
ISHVI,  236 

Israel,  Meaning  of  name,  79 

„  History  of:  Migrates  from 
Babylonia  to  Canaan,  74- 
5 ;  removes  into  Egypt, 
75 ;  is  oppressed  there  and 
escapes,  99-109;  wanders 
in  the  wilderness,  1 1 1-25 ; 
occupies  Eastern  Canaan, 
126-7  ;  conquers  Western 
Canaan,  170-87;!  ruled  by 
judges,  190-212;  ruled  by 
kings,  213-76,  294-386; 
divided  into  two  king- 
doms, 313  ;  deported  into 
exile,  363,  384,  386  ;  re- 
turns from  exile,  465,  473 

IssACHAR,  79,  182,  198 

Ittai,  265,  268 

Iye-abarim,  124 

lyyar,  518 

Jabal,  54 

JABBOK,  69,  127 

Jabesh-Gilead,  191,  215,  236,  240 
Jabin,  179,  198 
Jabneh,  355 
Jachiuy  302 
Jacob,  79-80 

,,     Blessing  of,  82,  97,  292 
Jaddua,  487 
Jael,  199,  290 


JAH,  91 

Jahaz,  126,  338,  515 

Jair,  183,  205 

Janoah,  361 

Japheth,  62,  64 

Japhetic  peoples,  64-6 

Jarmuth,  178 

Jashar,  Book  of,  14,  177,  178 

Javan,  65 

JE,  6,  41,  55,  91,  107,  128,  etc. 

Jebusites,  70,  169,  184,  246 

Jeconiah,  see  Jehoiachin 

Jedidiah,  see  Solomon 

Jehoahaz  (i),  see  Ahaziah 

(2),  348 

(3),  see  Ahaz 

(4),  381 
Jehohanan,  478 
Jehoiachin,  384,  390 
Jehoiada,  348-9 
Jehoiakim,  381 
Jehonadab,  Jonadab  (i),  263 
(2),  346 
Jehoram,  Joram  (i),  343 

(2),  340-5 

Jehoshaphat  (i),  258,  306 

(2),  331-2,  338,   340 

Valley  of,  332,  501 

Jehovah,  91-2,  104 

Jehovah  of  Hosts,  279 

Jehovah  nissi,  113 

Jehovah  Shalom,  200 

Jehozabad,  350 

Jehu  (i),  327 

(2),  336,  337,  345-8,  401 

JEHUD,  324 

Jephthah,  205-7 

Jerahmeelites,  240 

Jeremiah,  376,  379,  382-9,  415-6, 
417,  441-52 

Jeremiah,  23 

Jericho,  170,  173,  197,  314,  332 

Jeroboam  I.,  308,  313-4,  321-3 
n.,  353-5 

Jerubbaal,  see  Gideon 

Jerusalem,  76,  168,  175,  178,  184, 
185, 246-7, 265,270,281,300-1,352, 
369,371,384,386,477-8,480-2 

Jeshanah,  325 

Jeshua,  467,  506-7 

Jesse,  223 

Jethro,  102,  113,  114,  117 

Jezebel,  330,  332,  335,  337,  345,  400 

Jezrbel,  23s,  241,  344,  346 


526 


OLD  TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


JOAB,  241-3,  247,  249,  253,  263,  265, 

268,  270-2,  294 
JOASH,  JEHOASH,  (l)  349-5O 
(2)  351-2 

Job,  18-19,  507-8,  510 

JOCHEBED,  92,  lOI 

Joel,  217 
Joel,  27-8,  498-501 
TOHANAN  (l),  3S8 
(2),  486 
JOKTAN,  72 

Jokthekl,  352 
Jonah,  354 
Jonah,  29,  502-3 
Jonathan  (i),  184 

(2),  218-20,  226-8,  235-6 

(3),  251,  258 

JOPPA,  167,  299 

Jordan,  69,  166,  171-2,  339,  341 
,,        Passage  of  the,  171-2 

Joseph,  13,  80-1,  182 

Joshebbeshebeth,  260 

Joshua  (i),  minister  to  Moses,  113, 
116,  118,  120,  140, 
143 ;  succeeds  Moses, 
129,  130;  establishes 
Israel  in  Canaan.  1 70- 
80 ;  his  parting  address 
and  death,  187-9 
(2)  see  Jeshua 

Joshua,  6 

JosiAH,  375-81 

Jotham  (i),  203 

(2),  357-9 

JOZACAR,  350 
JUBAL,  54 

Jubilee,   Year  of,  1^6  [269 

JUDAH,  79,  80,  174-5,  181,  196,  209, 

,,      Kingdom  OF,  313-86 
Judges,  The,  190-212 

the  nature  of  their  authority, 

193-4 
Judges,  9 

Justice  enjoined,  157,  425,  49S 

Kadesh,  76,  119,  121,  181 
Kanah,  165,  182 
Karkor,  201,  335 
Kaush,  87 
Kedemoth,  126 
Kedesh  (i),  188,  198,  199 

(2),  199 
Keilah,  230,  324 

KeNITKS,  92,  102,  128,  199,  222,  239 


Keturah,  78 

Khabiri,  168 

Kibroth  hattaavah,  118 

Kid,  Seething  of  a,  157 

Kidnapping  punished,  153 

KiDRON,  300 

Kindness  enjoined,  157,  439-40 

Kings,  9-10 

„      Chronology  of,  317-21 
KiR,  73,  362 
Kirhareseth,  341 

KiRIATHAIM,    181,  514 

Kiriath-Arba,  see  Hebron 
KiRiATH  -  Baal,      see      Kiriath  - 

Jearim 
Kiriath-Jearim,  169,  177, 182,212, 

248 
Kiriath-Sannah,  see  Debir 
Kiriath-Sepher,  see  Debir 
Kishon,  69,  165,  198 
Kitron,  185 

KiTTIM,  65 
KoRAH,  122 

Laban,  79 

Lachish,  178,  353,  371 

Laiimi,  225,  251 

Laish,  see  Dan  (town) 

Lamech,  54,  55 

Lamentations,  23,  24,  391 

Land,  Tenure  of,  156 

Lasha,  70 

Law,    The,    114-7,    134-64,    286-7, 

399,  483-4,  492-S 
Leah,  79 
Lebanon,  68,  165 
Labashi-merodach,  393 
Legislation  of  Moses,  114-7,  134-64, 
,,         „       Ezra    and    Nehemiah, 
483-4,  492-5 
Lehabim,  67 
Leprosy,  151 

Leshem,  see  Dan  (town) 
Lethech,  516 
Levi,  Levites,  79, 80,  142-3, 283-4, 

322,  349,  399,  438,  456,  474,  483-4 
Levirate  marriage,  155 
Levy,  258,  305 
Lex  talionis,  153,  154,  159 
Libnah,  343,  371 
Lions,  209,  323,  334,  364 

LO-DEBAR,  244 

Log,  516 
Lot,  74,  75,  77 


INDEX 


527 


LuD,  7« 

LUDIM,  67 

Luz,  176 

Maacah  (locality),  252 

(person),  325,  327 
Maccabees,  490 
Machir  (i),  186,  198 
(2),  244,  267 
Machpelah,  78,  81 
Madai,  65 
Madon,  179 

Magog,  65,  450  [324 

Mahanaim,  79,  181,  236,  241,  267, 
Makkedah,  177,  178,  324 
Malachi,  472,  496-9 
Malachi,  31 
Malcah,  85 
Malchijah,  479 
Male  children,  Destruction  of,  100 
Manasseh  (i),  Manassites,  80,  81, 
127,  181-2,   185-6, 
200-3,  205 

(2),  373-S 

(3),  485 
Afaneh,  516 
Manna,  112,  172 
Manoah,  208,  284 
Maon,  231 
Marah,  III 
Markheshvan^  518 
Maremoth,  475,  479 
Mareshah,  327 
Marriage,  154-5 
Mass  AH,  112 

Mattaniah,  see  Zedekiah 
Medad,  118 

Medeba,  253,  338,  514,  515 
Medes,  379,  393  [380 

Megiddo,  168,  185,  234,  297,  345, 
Melchizedek,  76 
Melchi-shua,  236 
Meleck^  84 
Menahem,  358 

Mephibosheth,  see  Meribbaal 
Merab,  226,  236,  245 
Merciful  conduct  enjoined,  157,  440 
Mercy -seat  ^  14 1 
Meribah,  112,  123 
Meribbaal,  244,  266,  269,  279 
Mernptah,  99,  121,  168 
Merodach,  43,  85,  86 
Merodach-Baladan,  367-9 
Merom,  69,  179 


Meroz,  194 

Mesha,  338,  514-S 

Meshech,  66 

Mesopotamia,  196  (see  also  Aram, 

Syria) 
Messianic  Prophecy,  53,  97,  292-3, 

419,  431-6,  451-2,  463-4,  505-7 
Meiheg-Ammak,  251 
Meunim,  356 
MiCAH  (i),  184,  283 

(2),  360,  365,  418.  422-36 
Micah,  29 
MiCAiAH,  338 

MiCHAL,  226,  231,  236,  242,  248 

MiCHMASH,  2X8,  325 

MiDIAN,    MiDIANITES,    74,    78,    80, 

92,  102,   129,  200-3 
MiGDOL,    108 

Mighty  men,  David^s,  260 
Mz/com,  S7y  207,  254,  308 
Afi//o,  247 

MiNNITH,  206  [173,   178 

Miracles,  32-5, 107, 109-10,112, 171 -2, 

Miriam,  ioi,  119,  122 
„         Song  of,  109 

Misappropriation  of  property,  154 

Mithredath,  477 

MizPAH  (i),  206 

(2),  217,  281,  328,  387,  388 

Mizraim,  67 

Moab,  Moabites,  74,  77,  126-8, 
196-7,  220,  229-30,  252,  314,  315, 
329,337, 340, 351. 353, 356,  383, 385 

Moabite  Stone,  514-5 

Molech,  84 

Molten  Sea,  The,  303,  362 

Monarchy,  The,  213-76,  294-386 

Monotheism,  158,  278,  424,  439,  454 

Mordecai,  473 

Moreh,  Terebinth  of,  88 
,,        Hill  of,  201 

MORIAH,  77 

Moses,  Early  life  of,  101-2;  sojourns 
in  the  desert,  102-4  5  leads  Israel 
out  of  Egypt,  105-8 ;  leadership  and 
legislation  in  the  Wilderness,  108- 
29;  death  and  character,  130-33 

Mosaic  Age,  Religion  in  the,  134-64 

Murder  prohibited,  137,  152 

Musre,  335,  343 

Naaman,  341 
Nabal,  231 
Nabopolassar,  380 


528 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Naboth,  337 
Nabdnahid,  393 
Nacon,  248 
Nadab  (i),  124 
(2),  326 
Nahalol,  185 
Nahash,  215 
Nahor,  74 

Nahum,  415,  418,  441 
Nahum,  29 
Naioth,  227 
Naphtali,  79,  183,  185,  198,  203, 

361 

Naphtdhim,  67 

Nathan,  262,  271,  291,  292 

Naziritesy  152,  208,  286 

Nebo  (god),  85 

„      (locality),  130,  181,  338,  515 

Nebuchadnezzar,  see  Nebuchad- 
rezzar 

Nebuchadrezzar,  25,  382-7,  392 

Nebuzaradan,  386-7 

Necho  I.,  374-5 
..     II.,  380-83 

Negeb,  166,  182 

Nehemiah,  479-86 

Nehemiah,  10,  il,  15 

Nekushtan,  365 

Nephilim,  57 

Nergal,  85,  87 

Nergal-sharezer,  393 

Nethinim  466,  474 

New  Moon,  Feast  of  the,  149,  228,  285 

NiMROD,  67 

Nineveh,  73,  379-80 

Nisan,  516 

Noah,  57,  58,  62 
,,      Sons  of,  62,  64 

No-Amon,  see  Thebes 

Nob,  229-30,  281 

Nody  Latidof,  54 

Northern  Israel,  Kingdom  of,  321-64 

Numbering  the  people,  249 

Obadiah  (I),  33S 

(2),  441  foU. 
Obadiah,  28 
Obed-edom,  248 
Og,  126,  127 

Olives,  Mount  of,  266,  281 
Omer^  516 
Omri,  329-30,  514 
On,  122 
Ophel,  301,  359 


Ophir,  300,  339 
Ophrah  (i),  200,  202,  281 

(2),  218 
Oppression  of  the   poor   prohibited, 

157 
Oracles,  88-9,  143,  282,  402 
Ordeal  for  unfaithfulness,  155 
Oreb,  203 
Ornan,  250 
Othniel,  175,  196 
Ox,  dangerous,  153 

P,  5-6  (see  also  Priestly  Narrative, 
Priestly  Code) 

Paltiel,  231,  243 

Parables,  406-7 

Paran,  117 

Passover,  The,  106,  108,  146,  148, 
149,  172,  366,  379 

Pathros,  Pathrusim,  67 

Patriarchal  history,  63-83 

Peace-ofFerings,  147 

Pekah,  358-62 

Pekahiah,  358 

Peleg,  72 

Pelethites,  251,  259 

Pentateuch,  3-8,  492 

Penuel,  79,  194,  201,  322 

Perez,  80 

Perizzites,  70,  169 

Personal  injuries,  152-4 

Pethor,  127 

Pharaoh,  76,80 (see  also  Egyptians) 

Philistines,  67,  82,  108,  169,  183, 
197,  20S-12,  217-20,  224-6,  229, 
230, 232-6,  240-1,  245-6,  251,  315, 
329,  331.  343,  350,  366-70 

Phinehas  (i),  129,  188-9,  i92|  283 

(2),  210,  283 

Phraortes,  379 

PlHAHIROTH,   108 
Pillar  of  cloud ,  IIO,  I40 
Pillars,  Religious  use  of,  88,  92,  138, 
141,  302,  332,  365,  398,  404,  438 

PiSGAH,  130 
PiTHOM,  99 

Plagues  of  Egypt,  105-7 
Poles,  Religious  use  of,  88  (see  also 
Asherah) 

POTIPHAR,  80 

Predictions  of  prophets,  4 1 3-2 1 
Prehistoric  world.  The,  37-62 
Priest,     Priesthood,     142-4,    282-4, 
322,  326,  331,  357,  398-9,  492-4 


INDEX 


529 


Priestly  cities,  150,  188-9,  285 
„       dues,  150-1,  285,  484,  493 
ff       narrative,  Priestly  code,  5,  6, 
92,  122,  129,  141-2,  143-4, 
146-7,  149-50,  151,  152-3, 
156,157,286-7,399,492-3 
Prophetic  narrative,  6  (see  also  JE) 
Prophets,  Prophecy,  89,  163,  287-93, 
402,405-36,441-64, 491-2,496-507 
Proverbs^  19,  311 
Psalms,  16-8,  275-6,  373,  391,  495-6 

PSAMMETICHUS  I.,   380 
11.,  388 

Pseudo-Smerdis,  469 

psieukhannit  ii.,  296 

Ptolemy  I.-VIL,  488-90 

PuAH,  100 

PuL,  357 

Purifn,  473 

Purity,  Sensuous  conceptions  of,  159, 

287,  457 
Put,  67-8,  450 

Quails,  112,  118 
Queen-mother,  294 

Raamah,  66 

Raamses,  99 

Rabbah,  253 

Rabbith,  324 

Rabsaris,  371 

Rabshakeh^  37 1 

Rachel,  79 

Rachel's  tomb,  215 

Rahab,  171 

Rainbow,  62 

Ramah,  213,  214,  217,  227,  281,  328 

Ramathavn-zophim^  213 

Ramath-lehi,  209 

Rameses  II.,  99,  168 

„      III.,  169,  196 
Ramman,  Rimmon,  85,  87 
Ramman-nirari  III.,  351 
Ramoth-Gilead,  188,  338,  344 
Rebekah,  78 
Rechabites,  92,  383 
Red  Sea,  Passage  of  the,  109 
Refuge,  Cities  of,  152-3,  188-9 
Rehob  (i),  183 
(2),  252 
Rehoboam,  312-3,  323-5 
Rehum,  477 
Religion  in  the  Patriarchal  Age,  84-97 

„        in  the  Mosaic  Age,  134-164 


Religion  from  the  Conquest  to  David, 

277-93 
,,      in  the  Syrian  Age,  397-402 
,,      in  the  Assyrian  Age,  403-5, 

422-36 
,,      in  the  Babylonian  Age,  436- 

52 
,,      in  the  Age  of   the  Exile, 

452-64 
„      after  the  return    from    the 
Exile,  491-5 1 1 
Rephaim,  Valley  of,  181,  246 
Rephidim,  112 

Resurrection,  Belief  in  the,  509-10 
Return  from  the  Exile,  465-7 

„      Religion  after  the,  491-51 1 
Reuben,  Reubenites,  79,  80,  127, 

171,  180-1,  188,  220 
Reuel,  see  Jethro 
Rezin,  359-62 
Rezon,  296 

RiBLAH,  381,  386 

Riphath,  65 

River  of  Egypt,  296 

Rizpah,  245 

Roads,  166-7 

Route  from  Sinai  to  Moab,  1 17-25 

Ruth,  186,  223 

Rutk^  9 

Sabako,  363,  367 

Sabbath,  The,  43,  44, 87,  93, 137, 147, 

149,  161,  457,  485 
Sabbatical  year,  156,  i6i,  484 
Sabtah,  66 
Sabteca,  66 
Sacred  Days  and  Seasons,  147-50, 

285,  322,  399,  483 
Sacrifice,  54,  58,61, 93, 144-7,  284-5, 

426,  497 
Salem,  76 
Samaria,  329,  333,  342-3,  363,  364, 

374,  388 
Samaritans,  468,  481 
Samson,  208-10 

Samuel,  213-7,  221-3,  227,  233,290 
Samuel,  9 

Sanballat,  481,  485 
Sanctuaries,  Plurality  of,  140,  281-2 

(see  also  High  Places') 
Sarai,  Sarah,  75,  76,  77 
Sargon,  363,  364,  367 
Satan,  508 
Satyrs,  52,  377 


530 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Saul,  chosen  to  be  king,  214-217; 
his  wars,  2 1 7-20 ;  his  estrange- 
ment from  Samuel,  221-2 ;  his 
relations  with  David,  224-32;  his 
death  and  character,  235-8 

Scribes,  258,  474 

Scythians,  376,  379,  380,  417 

Seak,  516 

Seba,  66 

Seduction,  155 

Seer,  217,  288 

Seir,  74,  79 

Sela,  352 

Seleucds  I.-IV.,  488,  489 

Semitic  peoples,  The,  64,  71-2 

,,  Religion  of  the,  84-91 

Senir,  68,  347 

Sennacherib,  367-72 

Sepharvaim,  363 

Seraiah,  258 

Serbal,  102,  113 

Serpent,  The,  52-3 

„        The  Brazen,  124,  365 

Servant  of  Jehovah,  The,  461-3 

Seth,  55 

Seventy,  416,  467 

Sexual  immorality  in  religion,  91, 
161,  327,  331,  365,  373,  398,400 

Shaalbim,  184,  185 

Shaaraim,  225 

Shabatak,  369,  373 

Shaddai,  91 

Shallum,  358 

Shalmaneser  II.,  334,  347 
»  ni.,  354 

IV.,  363 

Shamash,  Shemksh,  85 

Shamgar,  197 

Shammah  (i),  223 
(2),  260 

Shaphan,  376 

Sheba  (person),  270 

,,      (locality),  67,  299,  309 

Sh^bat,  518 

Shebna,  369,  371 

Shecaniah,  476 

Shechem,  75,  79,  80,  186,  188,  203, 
204,  313,  321,  388 

Shekel,  516 

Shelah,  Pool  of,  301 

Shem,  62,  64 

Shemaiah  (i),  313,  324 
M        (2),  390 
(3).  482 


Sfuol,  94-5,  159 

Shephelah,  165 

Sheshbazzar,  466 

Sheva,  258 

Shewbread,  14 1,  144,  229,  284-$ 

Shibboleth,  207 

Shihor,  181 

Shihor-libnath,  183 

Shiloh  (personal  name),  97 

„        (locality),  97,  179,  180,  191, 
210-11,  280-1,  314,  388 
Shimei,  266,  269,  272,  295 
Shimron,  179 
Shimshai,  477 
Shinar,  72,  76 
Shiphrah,  100 

Shishak,  186,  296,  308,  322,  324 
Shittim,  170 
Shobi,  268 

Shobach,  Shophach,  253 
Shunem,  324 
Shunammite  woman,  341 
Shur,  III 
Shushan,  480 
Sibbecai,  251 

SiCCUTH,  403 
SlDDlM,  76 

Signs,  105,  107,  200,  215,  361,  433 
Significant  names,  407,  433 

SiHON,  126,  280 

SiLOAM,  301  [181 

Simeon,  Simeonites,  79-81,  174-5, 

Sin  (god),  85 

Sin,  The  wilderness  of,  hi 

Sin-offerings,  147 

Sinai,  102,  113 

Sinaitic  legislation,  I14-7,  134-58 

SiNITES,  68 

SiN-SHAR-ISH-KIN,  379 

Sion,  68 

SiRION,  68 
SiSERA,  198-200 

Sivan,  518 

Slavery,  156-7 

So,  see  Sabako 

SocHO,  Soco,  324,  360 

Sodom,  70,  76,  77 

sogdianus,  486 

Solomon,  263,  271-2,  294-311,  395; 
his  territory,  296;  his  justice,  298;  his 
trade,  298-300;  his  buildings,  30Q-5 

Song  of  the  Bow,  240 

Song  of  Miriam,  109,  158 
„       Moses,  131 


INDEX 


531 


Song  of  Songs ^  19,  311  ( 

Songs  the  source  of  early  history,  13-4 

Sons  of  God,  57 

Sons  of  the  prophets i  340,  342,  402 

Sorcery  prohibited,  139 

SoREK,  Valley  of,  181,  182,  197 

Span,  517 

Stealing  prohibited,  137,  154 

Stubborn  son.  Punishment  of  a,  153 

SuccoTH  (i),  108 

(2),  79,  194,  201 
Sumerian,  73 
Symbolic  actions,  407-8 
Syria,  Syrians,  196,  299,  315,  328, 

330,  332-5,  338,  341-4,  348,  351. 

353.  359-62,  383  (see  also  Aram) 
Syrian  Age,  Religion  in  the,  397-402 

Taanach,  185,  324 

Tabeel,  477 

Taberah,  118 

Tabernacle,  The,  115,  140-2,211,229 

Tabernacles y  Feast  of,  148,  150,  304, 

322,  399,  468,  483,  502 
Tabor,  Mount,  198 

,,       Terebinth  of,  215 
Tadmor,  297 
Tahpanhes,  389 
Tahpenes,  296,  309 
Talent,  516 

Talmai,  263  [i,  18 

Talmud  on  the  authorship  of  the  O.T., 
Tamar  (locality),  297,  456 

,,       (person)  (i),  80 
(2),  263 
(3),  268 
Tammuz,  382 
Tammuz,  518 
Tappuah, 182 
Tarshish,  65,  300 
Tartan,  371 
Tebeth,  518 

Tekoa,  Wilderness  of,  332 
Telaim,  222  [168,  170 

Tell-el-Amarna  Tablets,   12,  73,  99, 
Temple,  The  First,  300-4,  316,  350, 
378,  386,  396,  399,  401 
„       The  Second,  467-71,  495 
Ten  Tribes,  Kingdom  of  the,  321-64 
Tent  of  Meeting,  see  Tabernacle 
Terah,  74,  75 

Teraphim,  79,  80, 89, 95,  227, 282,  378 
Thaumaturgy  of  Moses,  103,  105,  107 
Thebes,  374 


Thebez,  204 
Theft,  see  Stealing 
Thirty,  The,  260 
Thothmes  I.,  99 
»       in.,  99 
Three,  The,  260 
Thummim,  see  Urim 
Tidmat,  43 
Tibni,  329 
Tidal,  76,  83 

Tiglath-Pileser,  357,  360-2 
Timnah,  208,  360  [188 

Timnath-heres,  Timnath-skrah, 
Tiphsah  (i),  296 

(2).  358 

TiRAS,  66 

Tirhakah,  370,  373,  374 

Tirshatha,  466 

Tirzah,  321,  326,  329,  358 

TlSHBEH,  335 

Tishri,  518 

Tithes,  150,  151,  484,  497 

Tob,  205,  252 

Tobiah,  481,  484 

Togarmah,  65,  450 

Toi,  Toil,  255 

Tola,  205 

Topheth,  377 

Trade,  166-7,  255,  298-300 

Trees,  Worship  at,  87-8 

Trumpets,  Feast  of,  149 

Tubal,  66 

Tubal-cain,  54 

Tyre,  183,  255,  299,  330,  347,  351, 

370,  385,  392,  487 
Tyropoeon,  301 

Uncleanness,  15 1-2,  286 
Unclean  animals,  93  [149 

Unleavened  Bread,  Feast  of ,  106,  148, 
Ur,  73,  74,  75 
Uriah  (i),  262 
(2),  382 
Urijah,  362 
Urim  and  Thummim,  89,  143,  219, 

282,  402,  468 
Usury  prohibited,  157,  482 
Uzzah,  248 
UzziAH,  355-7 

Vain  use  of  Jehovah's  name,  137,  139 
Valley  of  Salt,  254 
Visible    representation     of    Jehovah 
forbidden,  137,  139,  160,  423 


532 


OLD   TESTAMENT   HISTORY 


Visions,  410-11,  503 
Vows,  152,  206,  285-6 

Wanderings  in  the  wilderness,  iii- 

29,  163 
IVars  of  Jehovah,  Book  of  the,  14 
Wave  breast,  151 
Weeks,  Feast  of  148,  149 
Wisdom,  311 
Witch  of  Endor,  235 

Xerxes  I.,  472 
„      11. ,  486 

Zabad,  350 

Zabud,  306  [306 

Zadok,  259,  265,  269,  271,  283,  295, 
Zair,  343 

ZaLMUNNA,  201 

Zamzummim,  74 
Zaphenath  Paneah,  80 
Zaphon,  207 
Zarephath,  336 

ZeBAH,  201 

Zeboiim,  70,  76 

Zeboim,  218 

Zebul,  204 

Zebulun,  79,  182,  185,  198,  434 

Zechariah  (i),  350 
(2).  357-8 
(3)1  469,  496-502 


Zechariah,  30-1 
Zedekiah,  384-6 
Zeeb,  203 
Zelah,  236,  245 
Zemara,  Simyra,  68 
Zephaniah,  441  foil. 
Zephaniah,  30 
Zephath,  120,  175 
Zerah  (i),  80 

(2),  327-9 
Zered,  124 
Zeredah,  308,  313 
Zerubbabel,  466,  505-7 
Zeruiah,  223 

ZiRA,  244,  266,  269 

ZiDON,  68,  183,  315,  330,  332,  347 
351,  370,  374,  385,400 

ZlKLAG,   182,  233,  239 
ZiLLAH,  54 
ZiLPAH,  79 

Zimri,  329 

ZiON,   301 
ZiPH,  231 

Zipporah,  102,  103,  119 
Ziv,  518 
ZOAN,  75 

ZoAR,  76,  77 
Zobah,  220,  252,  296 

ZORAH,  182,  208 


\V.  Brendon  and  Son,  Limited,  Plymouth 


3  1158  00141 


5230 


."•; 


;w:! 


11! 


!ll 


liil 


ill 


iiiiiii 


iiM' 


!* 


illiii'ililliliililiiiiii 


mm 

■'ti'" 


»;'f'i;."im:;'ii 


I  1'^ 


i!  ■"ilpiiiii  i  iililil 


^SmB 


I'm^mgi 


Si' 


Still  I!)  >« 

111 


% 


m 

i  iiiii 


.|tesp 

i;  :tM    iil'l'       I 
•  ',MI      Hi  !    .if 


,;ai!  I   '1 


i  ill 


.111 


tl   ■  ■   '.J',!l  M 


IlliiiiiiPiiiiii 

1  liih;^, . 


fill 

!ihl  Mill   Ml       j 


iiii!iP!l!ll!l 


I 

ll 
i 


HlilHIliiilliin 


